(H/T SDA For Picture) Absolutely mind boggling Layton would call that place a community clinic. Even worse is the fact the media let's him get away with it. For anyone not a fan of Jack Layton and wondering where he gets off, wellllllllll.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Best Little Whorehouse In Texas Being Renamed Best Little Community Clinic In Texas
(H/T SDA For Picture) Absolutely mind boggling Layton would call that place a community clinic. Even worse is the fact the media let's him get away with it. For anyone not a fan of Jack Layton and wondering where he gets off, wellllllllll.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Rob Ford Was Convicted Of DUI, Jack Layton Got Off...
Socialists are up in arms over a Sun TV story about Jack Layton being found in a bawdy house 16 years ago. Layton was never charged but notes were taken by the attending officers. Dippers, led by Layton's wife, Olivia Chow, call this a pathetic smear.
And yet when the Toronto mayor's race continually involved smears against Rob Ford socialists applauded with glee. Hypocrisy?
And yet when the Toronto mayor's race continually involved smears against Rob Ford socialists applauded with glee. Hypocrisy?
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Metroland Media Group Endorses Conservative Majority
"Durham Region residents head to the federal election polls next Monday for the fourth time in seven years.
Like other Canadians, they are tired of being pulled back to the ballot box after seven years of political uncertainty. Starting with Paul Martin's minority Liberal government in 2004, Canadians have since elected two more successive minorities, this time with the Conservatives led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
It's time for Durham Region -- and voters across the nation -- to choose stability and provide Mr. Harper's Conservatives with the coveted majority they have been patiently building towards since 2006.
Under a Conservative government, Canadians can expect continued and competent fiscal management, sharp focus on the recession-induced deficit, a business climate that will lure investment and, perhaps most importantly, a period of political stability and freedom in which a majority government can develop and implement its agenda.
The jockeying and pure political partisanship that has been the hallmark of the last two minority governments has left Canada without traction on the economy, on new policies, on progress. The election of a majority government will also finally break the coalition culture in Ottawa that has overtaken the business of the day.
Stephen Harper has proven himself here at home and abroad as an able, knowledgeable and hard-working prime minister. He leads by example, keeps a keen focus on the Conservative agenda, and has consistently projected an assuring image as a quiet, competent prime minister even as his agenda is hobbled by his government's minority status. But, Canadians are confident that when he says his government will eliminate the deficit by 2014-2015, it will be done.
It is precisely this sort of assuredness, this clear sense of purpose and direction for the nation, that Durham residents must consider when they head to the ballot box on May 2.
Do they want another shortened term of government where politics drives the agenda, or one driven by ideas and achievement? Do they want a government limited by the ambitions of political insiders, or a government that can carry out the business of the day? Finally, do they want a government that could fall at any time -- once again -- so that they are forced to choose for the fifth time in eight years? Nine years?
It's time for majority rule in Ottawa. The party best suited with experience, a clear agenda and the ambition to see it through is the Conservatives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Metroland Durham Region Media Group
Like other Canadians, they are tired of being pulled back to the ballot box after seven years of political uncertainty. Starting with Paul Martin's minority Liberal government in 2004, Canadians have since elected two more successive minorities, this time with the Conservatives led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
It's time for Durham Region -- and voters across the nation -- to choose stability and provide Mr. Harper's Conservatives with the coveted majority they have been patiently building towards since 2006.
Under a Conservative government, Canadians can expect continued and competent fiscal management, sharp focus on the recession-induced deficit, a business climate that will lure investment and, perhaps most importantly, a period of political stability and freedom in which a majority government can develop and implement its agenda.
The jockeying and pure political partisanship that has been the hallmark of the last two minority governments has left Canada without traction on the economy, on new policies, on progress. The election of a majority government will also finally break the coalition culture in Ottawa that has overtaken the business of the day.
Stephen Harper has proven himself here at home and abroad as an able, knowledgeable and hard-working prime minister. He leads by example, keeps a keen focus on the Conservative agenda, and has consistently projected an assuring image as a quiet, competent prime minister even as his agenda is hobbled by his government's minority status. But, Canadians are confident that when he says his government will eliminate the deficit by 2014-2015, it will be done.
It is precisely this sort of assuredness, this clear sense of purpose and direction for the nation, that Durham residents must consider when they head to the ballot box on May 2.
Do they want another shortened term of government where politics drives the agenda, or one driven by ideas and achievement? Do they want a government limited by the ambitions of political insiders, or a government that can carry out the business of the day? Finally, do they want a government that could fall at any time -- once again -- so that they are forced to choose for the fifth time in eight years? Nine years?
It's time for majority rule in Ottawa. The party best suited with experience, a clear agenda and the ambition to see it through is the Conservatives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Metroland Durham Region Media Group
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
CAW Workers DO NOT Endorse The Liberals
H/T To Joanne at Blue Like You. Seems the CAW, sorry, make that the dictators at the CAW are running around endorsing the Liberal candidates in roughly 50 ridings. A story appeared in the record, drawing this rebuttal from a CAW member:
"CAW disappoints
Re:
I was very disappointed when I read the article in today’s record indicating that the CAW is supporting the Liberal Party in the election. I feel this is undemocratic.
I feel that as a member of the CAW union, I should be able to choose for myself which party my union dues support. We intend to support the Conservatives.
Linda Toenders
Waterloo"
Ken Lewenza, you don't speak for me, a 33-year member of the CAW. Nor do you speak for the majority of workers in Brampton Assembly Plant or Windsor van plant. You want to endorse Liberal candidates? Make it clear that it's you and a select few in the CAW National that do, not the rank and file. And spare me the BS about the Conservatives being anti-democratic. One needs only look at your election as CAW head as an example of dirty tricks and an undemocratic process. I wonder how many people are aware that the CAW National is where many former union reps get appointed to upon being turfed by in-plant elections for doing a poor job.
You know, it must be nice when someone like Peggy Nash, making a six-figure salary from the National, a salary paid for from the union dues of workers like myself, can lose an election after leaving the National for two years, and be welcomed back into that cushy job, again, no questions asked.
There's a reason Colin Carrie won the past election in the riding of Oshawa, the support of CAW workers, who will again give him their own endorsement by voting to re-elect him to Parliament. It's also laughable that the NDP is running CAW Local 222 chair Chris Buckley in the Oshawa riding, with Buckley crying that the Conservatives never did anything for Oshawa. I'm guessing Mr. Buckley, much like yourself, is so far distanced from reality that he doesn't realize not one of those GM assembly plants would be open if not for the federal Conservative government issuing billions in loans to save those same workers jobs Buckley professes to represent.
Perhaps it's time the CAW National started focusing on what it is supposed to be doing, focusing on the workers who pay 2 1/2 hours pay per month for supposed union representation.
This CAW member supports and endorses the Conservative Party of Stephen Harper, and openly endorses the Conservative candidate for Ajax-Pickering, Chris Alexander. I, like every CAW member, no, make that every Canadian, has the right to endorse and vote for the candidate and party of their own choice.
That's what makes Canada the greatest country on the planet, and something those in the CAW National want to ignore.
"CAW disappoints
Re:
I was very disappointed when I read the article in today’s record indicating that the CAW is supporting the Liberal Party in the election. I feel this is undemocratic.
I feel that as a member of the CAW union, I should be able to choose for myself which party my union dues support. We intend to support the Conservatives.
Linda Toenders
Waterloo"
Ken Lewenza, you don't speak for me, a 33-year member of the CAW. Nor do you speak for the majority of workers in Brampton Assembly Plant or Windsor van plant. You want to endorse Liberal candidates? Make it clear that it's you and a select few in the CAW National that do, not the rank and file. And spare me the BS about the Conservatives being anti-democratic. One needs only look at your election as CAW head as an example of dirty tricks and an undemocratic process. I wonder how many people are aware that the CAW National is where many former union reps get appointed to upon being turfed by in-plant elections for doing a poor job.
You know, it must be nice when someone like Peggy Nash, making a six-figure salary from the National, a salary paid for from the union dues of workers like myself, can lose an election after leaving the National for two years, and be welcomed back into that cushy job, again, no questions asked.
There's a reason Colin Carrie won the past election in the riding of Oshawa, the support of CAW workers, who will again give him their own endorsement by voting to re-elect him to Parliament. It's also laughable that the NDP is running CAW Local 222 chair Chris Buckley in the Oshawa riding, with Buckley crying that the Conservatives never did anything for Oshawa. I'm guessing Mr. Buckley, much like yourself, is so far distanced from reality that he doesn't realize not one of those GM assembly plants would be open if not for the federal Conservative government issuing billions in loans to save those same workers jobs Buckley professes to represent.
Perhaps it's time the CAW National started focusing on what it is supposed to be doing, focusing on the workers who pay 2 1/2 hours pay per month for supposed union representation.
This CAW member supports and endorses the Conservative Party of Stephen Harper, and openly endorses the Conservative candidate for Ajax-Pickering, Chris Alexander. I, like every CAW member, no, make that every Canadian, has the right to endorse and vote for the candidate and party of their own choice.
That's what makes Canada the greatest country on the planet, and something those in the CAW National want to ignore.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Ignatieff Gets Booed By Hockey Fans!
H/T commenter Dirt on Joanne's blog. Funny only Sun TV ran this story.
Violations Of Elections Canada Laws In Ajax-Pickering?
There have been some (unproven) allegations of violations of EC laws in Ajax-Pickering. There have been allegations of partisan campaign advertising at polling stations, most notably the Nottingham polling station as well as the Ajax Community Center. In both cases the allegations, again unproven, concern partisan material, mainly campaign signs from Liberal incumbent Mark Holland being on polling property.
I checked out Nottingham school late last night and saw no partisan material, so either there was none or it had been already removed. An anonymous commenter on a previous thread had tipped me off and stated he/she had already complaimed to the EC DRO at the school. I just learned of the allegations at the ACC this morning.
If anyone in my riding of Ajax-Pickering sees any of this occuring, please send me pictures to paulsblues45@hotmail.com I'm interested in seeing violations by any party and how EC handles it.
I checked out Nottingham school late last night and saw no partisan material, so either there was none or it had been already removed. An anonymous commenter on a previous thread had tipped me off and stated he/she had already complaimed to the EC DRO at the school. I just learned of the allegations at the ACC this morning.
If anyone in my riding of Ajax-Pickering sees any of this occuring, please send me pictures to paulsblues45@hotmail.com I'm interested in seeing violations by any party and how EC handles it.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
So There Was Liberal Campaign Literature At U of Guelph
But wait, didn't the students deny there was any Liberal campaign literature? "Students also said a complaint that partisan materials were allowed near the voting station in violation of the rules was false." The problem is the two pictures here are taken from a website,and by saving the picture and then zooming in to the pamphlet, you can easily see it is from the Guelph Liberal candidate, Frank Valeriote. The second picture shows someone with a handfull of the pamphlets at the door handing them out.
So students who were quick to denounce the Conservative complaint regarding the special ballot might want to explain the seeming lack of credibility they have on the issue, seeing as how the pictures confirm what the Conservative candidate was occuring and against EC rules.
Will Elections Canada Investgate Liberals For "In and Out" This Election?
With just over a week to go until the May 2nd vote, it looks like desperation has really ramped up for Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party. Given Jack Layton's rise in polls, with some polls showing a Lib-Dipper statistical tie, one must wonder what the current mindset is in the Liberal war room.
Something announced this week really piqued my interest. Liberal leader will be doing a half hour stump speech on both Global TV as well as CTV. I'm guessing a half hour of tv time on either network doesn't come cheap. With the Liberals seeming to have more campaign ads than the other parties already airing, I wonder just how much room is left in Liberal campaign spending.
More direct to the point, I wonder how these half hour tv segments will be accounted for with Elections Canada. That's a lot of cash to spend on one day of advertising. I won't debate whether this is good use of campaign funds, but rather wonder if the full amount of the half hour infomercials will be fully charged to the National Liberal campaign.
Will EC allow any prtion of these amounts to be declared as expenses incurred by the local campaign? If so, I would think that flies in the face of the basis for in and out accounting practices.
Here's hoping the Conservative and NDP camps closely follow what occurs in this instance.
Something announced this week really piqued my interest. Liberal leader will be doing a half hour stump speech on both Global TV as well as CTV. I'm guessing a half hour of tv time on either network doesn't come cheap. With the Liberals seeming to have more campaign ads than the other parties already airing, I wonder just how much room is left in Liberal campaign spending.
More direct to the point, I wonder how these half hour tv segments will be accounted for with Elections Canada. That's a lot of cash to spend on one day of advertising. I won't debate whether this is good use of campaign funds, but rather wonder if the full amount of the half hour infomercials will be fully charged to the National Liberal campaign.
Will EC allow any prtion of these amounts to be declared as expenses incurred by the local campaign? If so, I would think that flies in the face of the basis for in and out accounting practices.
Here's hoping the Conservative and NDP camps closely follow what occurs in this instance.
Friday, April 22, 2011
It.s Not An NDP Surge, Or Just A Continuation Of A Liberal Trend
With political journalists and junkies all chattering about an NDP surge, it's worth pointing out that an 11 year trend might be a more reasonable explanation. Let's take a look at election results for the Liberals, starting with the 2000 election.
2000 election-liberal majority 172 seats
2004 election-Liberal minority 135 seats
2006 election-Conservative minority Liberals 103 seats
2008 election-enhanced Conservative minority Liberals 77 seats
2011 election-Conservative majority/minority? Liberal seats estimated to be 55-83 seats.
So looking at the Liberal trendline, between the 2000 and 2008 election, Liberals saw a net loss of 95 seats over 3 elections. With Layton and the NDP surging, and polls such as Nanos putting the Lib/Dippers in a dead heat, could this not just be a continuation of the Liberal vote over the last 11 years?
My opinion is it is a result of both Layton doing well in the campaign and more voters on the left becoming more disenfranchised with the Liberal Party of Canada.
2000 election-liberal majority 172 seats
2004 election-Liberal minority 135 seats
2006 election-Conservative minority Liberals 103 seats
2008 election-enhanced Conservative minority Liberals 77 seats
2011 election-Conservative majority/minority? Liberal seats estimated to be 55-83 seats.
So looking at the Liberal trendline, between the 2000 and 2008 election, Liberals saw a net loss of 95 seats over 3 elections. With Layton and the NDP surging, and polls such as Nanos putting the Lib/Dippers in a dead heat, could this not just be a continuation of the Liberal vote over the last 11 years?
My opinion is it is a result of both Layton doing well in the campaign and more voters on the left becoming more disenfranchised with the Liberal Party of Canada.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Jack Layton Gets His Facts Wrong, Blames Conservatives For Things Liberals Did
Today's Globe and Mail headline-"Layton Blames Harper For Ontario Factory Shutdowns".(of course the Globe was to lazy to actually verify the facts before running that headline)
Pretty strong headline. The problem is Layton has his facts wrong.
"And the Bick’s Pickle in Dunnville, Ont., will shut down later this year, ending 240 jobs, because its owner, the J.M. Smucker Co. of Orrville, Ohio, decided to move the operation to the United States.
These factories are being “shut down because of a foreign takeover approved by the Harper government,” Mr. Layton said. “This is irresponsible economic policy.”
The problem is the purchase was done in 2004, under the Liberal government!
"In 1966, they sold the business to the Robin Hood Canada flour company (which in turn was later bought by International Multifoods of Wayzata, Minnesota), land and everything. The Bick family said the business had just got too big for them to handle.
In 2004, International Multifoods was purchased by the American company, J.M. Smucker. Smucker's sold off most of the other products, such as the flours, but kept Bick's.
Ok, so Layton got that wrong. No big deal, right? Wrong. Layton also blamed Harper for the closing of the Cangro canning plant in St. David's, near Welland-
"Nearly 150 employees lost their jobs when the CanGro canning plan in St. David’s, near Welland, closed its doors after more than a century of operation because Kraft Canada determined that it is cheaper to can fruit in China. A CanGro plant in Exeter near London was closed at the same time.
Uh oh! Layton got it wrong again. The sale of Cangro was actually done in December 2005, again under the Liberal government. And it was Layton's support of the Liberal budget that kept Paul Martin in office.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005 | 11:04 AM ET CBC News Kraft Foods' Canadian division is selling some of its Canadian brands and factories to two U.S. buyout firms for an undisclosed price.
Kraft announced Wednesday that Florida-based Sun Capital Partners and New York-based EG Capital Group will buy several product lines and five factories in Canada. EG Capital recently bought Laura Secord, the largest boxed chocolate retailer in Canada.
The product lines being acquired from Kraft include Aylmer, Primo pasta and soups, Ideal vegetables, Roma pasta, and the Canadian licensing rights for a number of Del Monte products, including canned fruits and vegetables.
The two buyout firms have formed a new company, CanGro Foods, to operate the grocery assets. About 800 Kraft Canada employees in Ontario and Quebec will transfer to CanGro.
So Layton is open to forming a coalition with the Liberals. One would think he might get his facts straight on who it is he wants to jump into bed with. Blaming Harper for something the Liberals did shows he might need to do some more studying before letting Ignatieff have his way with him.
Pretty strong headline. The problem is Layton has his facts wrong.
"And the Bick’s Pickle in Dunnville, Ont., will shut down later this year, ending 240 jobs, because its owner, the J.M. Smucker Co. of Orrville, Ohio, decided to move the operation to the United States.
These factories are being “shut down because of a foreign takeover approved by the Harper government,” Mr. Layton said. “This is irresponsible economic policy.”
The problem is the purchase was done in 2004, under the Liberal government!
"In 1966, they sold the business to the Robin Hood Canada flour company (which in turn was later bought by International Multifoods of Wayzata, Minnesota), land and everything. The Bick family said the business had just got too big for them to handle.
In 2004, International Multifoods was purchased by the American company, J.M. Smucker. Smucker's sold off most of the other products, such as the flours, but kept Bick's.
Ok, so Layton got that wrong. No big deal, right? Wrong. Layton also blamed Harper for the closing of the Cangro canning plant in St. David's, near Welland-
"Nearly 150 employees lost their jobs when the CanGro canning plan in St. David’s, near Welland, closed its doors after more than a century of operation because Kraft Canada determined that it is cheaper to can fruit in China. A CanGro plant in Exeter near London was closed at the same time.
Uh oh! Layton got it wrong again. The sale of Cangro was actually done in December 2005, again under the Liberal government. And it was Layton's support of the Liberal budget that kept Paul Martin in office.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005 | 11:04 AM ET CBC News Kraft Foods' Canadian division is selling some of its Canadian brands and factories to two U.S. buyout firms for an undisclosed price.
Kraft announced Wednesday that Florida-based Sun Capital Partners and New York-based EG Capital Group will buy several product lines and five factories in Canada. EG Capital recently bought Laura Secord, the largest boxed chocolate retailer in Canada.
The product lines being acquired from Kraft include Aylmer, Primo pasta and soups, Ideal vegetables, Roma pasta, and the Canadian licensing rights for a number of Del Monte products, including canned fruits and vegetables.
The two buyout firms have formed a new company, CanGro Foods, to operate the grocery assets. About 800 Kraft Canada employees in Ontario and Quebec will transfer to CanGro.
So Layton is open to forming a coalition with the Liberals. One would think he might get his facts straight on who it is he wants to jump into bed with. Blaming Harper for something the Liberals did shows he might need to do some more studying before letting Ignatieff have his way with him.
Media Refuses To Report On Non-Compete Agreement Between Opposition Parties
One would think this would be a major story. Talk of a coalition has been one of the major talking points since Day 1 of the campaign. All across the country we see the Conservative candidate campaigning hard every day. Lawn signs, door knocking, rallies, Conservative candidates are all out in public.
But what of the candidates for the opposition parties? Depending on the riding, you will most likely only see two candidates campaigning hard, the conservative and whichever opposition candidate has the best chance of winning the riding. Here in Ajax-Pickering, the NDP candidate did no campaigning, choosing to tan on a beach in the Caribbean instead. Sightings of NDP signs, or Green Party signs for that matter, number less than Bigfoot sightings.
Over in Oshawa, Liberals never even named a candidate till weeks after the campaign began. Again, while Conservative incumbent Colin Carrie is out campaigning hard, the only rival candidate seen is Dipper Chris Buckley. This riding is between the Conservatives and NDP.
There are reports of Quebec riding's where the same thing is going on. In some of these Quebec riding's, it appears that the non-compete agreement includes the Bloc. So why isn't this newsworthy? Why does the media not even make passing mention? Could it be the media themselves are complicit?
One could never prove it, but it looks painfully obvious that the coalition is alive and well, and that only a Conservative majority will put an end to it.
(if it appears there is a non-compete agreement in your riding, or you know of other riding's using a similar strategy, please leave info in comments, as I would like to do a future post on this with more riding's listed)
But what of the candidates for the opposition parties? Depending on the riding, you will most likely only see two candidates campaigning hard, the conservative and whichever opposition candidate has the best chance of winning the riding. Here in Ajax-Pickering, the NDP candidate did no campaigning, choosing to tan on a beach in the Caribbean instead. Sightings of NDP signs, or Green Party signs for that matter, number less than Bigfoot sightings.
Over in Oshawa, Liberals never even named a candidate till weeks after the campaign began. Again, while Conservative incumbent Colin Carrie is out campaigning hard, the only rival candidate seen is Dipper Chris Buckley. This riding is between the Conservatives and NDP.
There are reports of Quebec riding's where the same thing is going on. In some of these Quebec riding's, it appears that the non-compete agreement includes the Bloc. So why isn't this newsworthy? Why does the media not even make passing mention? Could it be the media themselves are complicit?
One could never prove it, but it looks painfully obvious that the coalition is alive and well, and that only a Conservative majority will put an end to it.
(if it appears there is a non-compete agreement in your riding, or you know of other riding's using a similar strategy, please leave info in comments, as I would like to do a future post on this with more riding's listed)
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Globe And Mail Rewriting History For Ignatieff
Another example of quality journalism from the Globe and Mail. Seems Ignatieff wants no part of talking about Quebec separation, on the heels of Gilles Duceppe stating they needed to stop a Conservative majority to make it easier for Quebec to separate. As pointed out by someone posting under the name Local_Voter, it seems the Globe is again guilty of having it's facts skewed. In it's haste to show Liberals were champions of the federalist cause the Globe included this gem about Jean Chretien:
"Jean Chrétien carried on the mantle, working with his unity minister Stéphane Dion to lead the federalist side during the 1995 Quebec referendum on sovereignty."
As noted by the poster, there is something that doesn't make any sense whatsoever about that statement. You see, at the time of the 1995 referendum, Dion wasn't unity minister. The referendum took place in Quebec on October 30, 1995. To make it even worse, Dion was neither an elected MP or cabinet minister. Dion was appointed to cabinet on January 25th, 1996, in anticipation of a by-election that would be called later in the year.
So will the Globe and Mail see fit to update the column? I highly doubt it. With Conservative numbers steady in polling, and Jack Layton making a surprising surge, the G&M, CBC, Toronto Star, etc., will continue to do whatever they can to help the visiting professor.
The hell with facts!
"Jean Chrétien carried on the mantle, working with his unity minister Stéphane Dion to lead the federalist side during the 1995 Quebec referendum on sovereignty."
As noted by the poster, there is something that doesn't make any sense whatsoever about that statement. You see, at the time of the 1995 referendum, Dion wasn't unity minister. The referendum took place in Quebec on October 30, 1995. To make it even worse, Dion was neither an elected MP or cabinet minister. Dion was appointed to cabinet on January 25th, 1996, in anticipation of a by-election that would be called later in the year.
So will the Globe and Mail see fit to update the column? I highly doubt it. With Conservative numbers steady in polling, and Jack Layton making a surprising surge, the G&M, CBC, Toronto Star, etc., will continue to do whatever they can to help the visiting professor.
The hell with facts!
About that Hansard quote highlighted in the latest Liberal ad ...Will Kady O'Malley Set The Record Straight?
Remember the media, led by CBC's Kady O'Malley, running to Michael Ignatieff's defence with multiple editorials that the Conservatives Attack ad took Ignatieff out of context? Let's see if Kady, or any journalist for that matter, holds their position with enough integrity to actually show the PM's words the new Liberal attack ad takes wildly out of context.
This post is a direct quote from comment left by Gabby in QC in a previous thread..
About that Hansard quote highlighted in the latest Liberal ad ...
Actual Stephen Harper quotes from speech in Hansard:
http://bit.ly/f9KNVF
“... The key is that necessary health care must be available to every Canadian regardless of ability to pay. ...
... the federal government must work with the provinces ...
... the Liberals opposed provincial efforts to broaden health care delivery within publicly paid health systems by not just fighting plans for private facilities in various provinces but by demonizing the provinces pursuing these reforms. This was wrong. ...
A government monopoly is not the only way to deliver health care to Canadians. Monopolies in the public sector are just as objectionable as monopolies in the private sector. It should not matter who delivers health care, whether it is private, for profit, not for profit or public institutions, as long as Canadians have access to it regardless of their financial means.
We must become innovative in how we deliver care while holding fast to the principle of universal care regardless of ability to pay. ...”
To thus whittle down Stephen Harper's lengthy speech to "private, for profit" in that Liberal ad is an outright lie.
This post is a direct quote from comment left by Gabby in QC in a previous thread..
About that Hansard quote highlighted in the latest Liberal ad ...
Actual Stephen Harper quotes from speech in Hansard:
http://bit.ly/f9KNVF
“... The key is that necessary health care must be available to every Canadian regardless of ability to pay. ...
... the federal government must work with the provinces ...
... the Liberals opposed provincial efforts to broaden health care delivery within publicly paid health systems by not just fighting plans for private facilities in various provinces but by demonizing the provinces pursuing these reforms. This was wrong. ...
A government monopoly is not the only way to deliver health care to Canadians. Monopolies in the public sector are just as objectionable as monopolies in the private sector. It should not matter who delivers health care, whether it is private, for profit, not for profit or public institutions, as long as Canadians have access to it regardless of their financial means.
We must become innovative in how we deliver care while holding fast to the principle of universal care regardless of ability to pay. ...”
To thus whittle down Stephen Harper's lengthy speech to "private, for profit" in that Liberal ad is an outright lie.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Canadians Should Rise Up and Elect A Conservative Majority
Ignatieff looks more and more desperate every passing day. He's tried to emulate the Obama campaign ad with his own, talking about the passing of his mother. He's tried copying Obama's mannerism's when speaking. He's tried mimicking Obama rallies. All with little success.
So now he wants Canadians to rise up, another take-off of Obama. Here's a tip Mikey. Nobody likes a copycat. Makes you look weak and desperate. Try acting like yourself. Oh, wait. That dog didn't hunt either. Never mind.
To all Canadians,on May 2nd, rise up and elect a majority Conservative government.
So now he wants Canadians to rise up, another take-off of Obama. Here's a tip Mikey. Nobody likes a copycat. Makes you look weak and desperate. Try acting like yourself. Oh, wait. That dog didn't hunt either. Never mind.
To all Canadians,on May 2nd, rise up and elect a majority Conservative government.
New Liberal Attack Ad Will Back Ignatieff Into Corner
Nice to see Kinsella thinks the new Liberal attack ad is great. I guess the high ground got washed away under Ignatieff, but I digress. I actually really like the ad, but for a completely different reason. Liberals are looking at getting walloped in Quebec, according to Chantel Hebert in her column in the Star. So when one looks at the ad, it claims quotes from Stephen Harper show him as one who would undermine Canadian health care. The one quote that stands out is this:
"Private, for profit health care (Hansard 10/01/2002)
The problem Ignatieff now faces goes by the name of Gilles Duceppe, who's main claim to fame is having the federal government keep it's nose out of what Quebecer's feel is provincial jurisdiction. So one would surmise from the quote in the Liberal ad that Ignatieff is against private, for profit health care, right? Well, coming on the same day the Liberal Party announced Paul Martin would be joining the campaign, it looks as though Donolo might have just set up some land mines for Ignatieff. Why? Read this:
"Many provinces are following Alberta’s lead. Ontario announced in June 2005 a $30 billion public-private-partnership fund for new schools and hospitals. All this money will go to for-profit corporations. The Cambie Surgery Centre in Vancouver boasts that it is Canada’s “most advanced private surgical centre in Canada” with “more operating capacity than most BC hospitals.” It is proud of its record servicing “famous athletes and celebrities” and known for the outspoken private-sector advocacy of its founder, Dr. Brian Day – or “Dr. Profit,” as he is often referred to. British Columbia has 14 private clinics, which looked after 50,000 paying customers in 2004.
Montreal was labelled the “private health care capital of Canada” by the Montreal Gazette, which conducted an investigation in February 2005. There is a “parallel system for the wealthy” in that city, said the newspaper, which reported that 90 doctors in Quebec have opted out of medicare, more than in all other provinces combined. One of them, Dr. Sheldon Elmer, is Prime Minister Paul Martin’s doctor. There are at least a dozen private medical imaging clinics and a number of knee and hip replacement clinics. The going rate for hip replacement is between $14,000 and $18,000. Montreal also has the first private emergency clinic and was, not surprisingly, the launching pad for the Supreme Court challenge.
So will Michael Ignatieff denounce the private. for profit health care in Quebec? Will he close private providers in Quebec? Will he tell Dalton McGuinty that Ontario cannot go ahead with the $30 billion private public-partnership? What about BC? Alberta?
More importantly, will any journalist question the contradiction of the Liberal attack ad and their 13 years in office? And will Ignatieff stand up for full public health care, risking backlash from Quebec voters?
I sure would like to know.
"Private, for profit health care (Hansard 10/01/2002)
The problem Ignatieff now faces goes by the name of Gilles Duceppe, who's main claim to fame is having the federal government keep it's nose out of what Quebecer's feel is provincial jurisdiction. So one would surmise from the quote in the Liberal ad that Ignatieff is against private, for profit health care, right? Well, coming on the same day the Liberal Party announced Paul Martin would be joining the campaign, it looks as though Donolo might have just set up some land mines for Ignatieff. Why? Read this:
"Many provinces are following Alberta’s lead. Ontario announced in June 2005 a $30 billion public-private-partnership fund for new schools and hospitals. All this money will go to for-profit corporations. The Cambie Surgery Centre in Vancouver boasts that it is Canada’s “most advanced private surgical centre in Canada” with “more operating capacity than most BC hospitals.” It is proud of its record servicing “famous athletes and celebrities” and known for the outspoken private-sector advocacy of its founder, Dr. Brian Day – or “Dr. Profit,” as he is often referred to. British Columbia has 14 private clinics, which looked after 50,000 paying customers in 2004.
Montreal was labelled the “private health care capital of Canada” by the Montreal Gazette, which conducted an investigation in February 2005. There is a “parallel system for the wealthy” in that city, said the newspaper, which reported that 90 doctors in Quebec have opted out of medicare, more than in all other provinces combined. One of them, Dr. Sheldon Elmer, is Prime Minister Paul Martin’s doctor. There are at least a dozen private medical imaging clinics and a number of knee and hip replacement clinics. The going rate for hip replacement is between $14,000 and $18,000. Montreal also has the first private emergency clinic and was, not surprisingly, the launching pad for the Supreme Court challenge.
So will Michael Ignatieff denounce the private. for profit health care in Quebec? Will he close private providers in Quebec? Will he tell Dalton McGuinty that Ontario cannot go ahead with the $30 billion private public-partnership? What about BC? Alberta?
More importantly, will any journalist question the contradiction of the Liberal attack ad and their 13 years in office? And will Ignatieff stand up for full public health care, risking backlash from Quebec voters?
I sure would like to know.
Laying Waste To The New Liberal Attack Ad In Record Time
So Ignatieff's desperation, or should that be Donolo/Chretien's desperation revealed itself today? Apparently yes. The Liberals have released a new attack ad, falsely claiming the Conservative government would gut health care if given a majority. As already pointed out by many Blogging Tories, it appears Liberals have already resigned themselves to an election loss, and hope to keep the Conservatives from getting a majority, as they believe a Conservative minority government is inevitable.
So what about that new Liberal attack ad? The one that claims Stephen Harper will cut $11 billion in spending, most of it being health care. The ad appears to have been hastily created, with no thought given to blow back or facts of the matter. So let's take a look at some of the easiest talking points Conservatives can use regarding the ad.
1. The current health accord, a contract signed by all provincial and federal government, doesn't expire until the end of fiscal year 2013-2014. If the Conservative government wins a majority, the longest they would remain in power is 2015, leaving only one year to make those supposed health care cuts.
2. Liberals are back to that hidden agenda thing again. Pathetic. So Mr. Ignatieff, your party never campaigned in 1993 on a platform that included health care cuts in the billions. That was a real hidden agenda. So what guarantee do we have Liberals won't slash health care and transfer payments again? Your word Mr. Ignatieff? Sorry. Got burned by Chretien/Martin before. Won't happen again.
3. Canada is predicted to lead the G7 in growth for the foreseeable future, according to the OCED and IMF. A growing economy means rising government revenues, lessening the need for budgetary cuts.
4. The Conservatives have already pledged to keep the 6% yearly increase past the year 2014, as have the Liberals and Dippers. In fact, over the past five years Conservatives have maintained that increase, as well as injecting health care money into various causes, such as health care amongst aboriginals. So we have seen the track record of the Conservatives, and the record of the Liberals. Liberals lose this comparison badly. Sorry Mr. Donolo, but you can't rewrite history.
5. As pointed out by the PM, there are 80,000 public sector employees who will be retiring in the next few years. Using attrition and cutting a bloated bureaucracy is solid financial and economic policy. Money saved that can be used for things like health care. Hmmm. That seems to fit in nicely with the Conservative platform of focusing on the economy.
6. As was pointed out to Ignatieff during the debates, the first expenditure of fighter jets doesn't occur for another five years. That blows the coalitions whole argument about jets we supposedly can't afford. Even the PBO predicts balanced budgets within five years. So no health care cuts to finance jets. There goes a pretty big plank of Ignatieff's platform.
7. To this day, the Liberals make no apologies for slashing billions from health care for Canadians. They blame Mike Harris for health care cuts in Ontario. The problem is the Liberals have a new leader ready for a coronation when Ignatieff falls on his own sword. A guy named Bob Rae. Scary. The fact is Harris increased health care spending, despite the fact the federal government of Chretien?Martin cut the federal share. And anyone who survived the "Rae years" already knows the challenges faced due to Rae's absolute incompetence as Ontario Premier. ( think of this point as a two-fer. Ignatieff and Rae)
I'm sure many others also have excellent points. Please post in the comments section.
So what about that new Liberal attack ad? The one that claims Stephen Harper will cut $11 billion in spending, most of it being health care. The ad appears to have been hastily created, with no thought given to blow back or facts of the matter. So let's take a look at some of the easiest talking points Conservatives can use regarding the ad.
1. The current health accord, a contract signed by all provincial and federal government, doesn't expire until the end of fiscal year 2013-2014. If the Conservative government wins a majority, the longest they would remain in power is 2015, leaving only one year to make those supposed health care cuts.
2. Liberals are back to that hidden agenda thing again. Pathetic. So Mr. Ignatieff, your party never campaigned in 1993 on a platform that included health care cuts in the billions. That was a real hidden agenda. So what guarantee do we have Liberals won't slash health care and transfer payments again? Your word Mr. Ignatieff? Sorry. Got burned by Chretien/Martin before. Won't happen again.
3. Canada is predicted to lead the G7 in growth for the foreseeable future, according to the OCED and IMF. A growing economy means rising government revenues, lessening the need for budgetary cuts.
4. The Conservatives have already pledged to keep the 6% yearly increase past the year 2014, as have the Liberals and Dippers. In fact, over the past five years Conservatives have maintained that increase, as well as injecting health care money into various causes, such as health care amongst aboriginals. So we have seen the track record of the Conservatives, and the record of the Liberals. Liberals lose this comparison badly. Sorry Mr. Donolo, but you can't rewrite history.
5. As pointed out by the PM, there are 80,000 public sector employees who will be retiring in the next few years. Using attrition and cutting a bloated bureaucracy is solid financial and economic policy. Money saved that can be used for things like health care. Hmmm. That seems to fit in nicely with the Conservative platform of focusing on the economy.
6. As was pointed out to Ignatieff during the debates, the first expenditure of fighter jets doesn't occur for another five years. That blows the coalitions whole argument about jets we supposedly can't afford. Even the PBO predicts balanced budgets within five years. So no health care cuts to finance jets. There goes a pretty big plank of Ignatieff's platform.
7. To this day, the Liberals make no apologies for slashing billions from health care for Canadians. They blame Mike Harris for health care cuts in Ontario. The problem is the Liberals have a new leader ready for a coronation when Ignatieff falls on his own sword. A guy named Bob Rae. Scary. The fact is Harris increased health care spending, despite the fact the federal government of Chretien?Martin cut the federal share. And anyone who survived the "Rae years" already knows the challenges faced due to Rae's absolute incompetence as Ontario Premier. ( think of this point as a two-fer. Ignatieff and Rae)
I'm sure many others also have excellent points. Please post in the comments section.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Conservative Candidate Trails by 700 Votes In Guelph Riding.....Election Three Weeks Away
So I did the obligatory post on Elections Canada U of G decision featuring sarcasm, and now it's time to give this situation a serious look. With Elections Canada already deeming the cast ballots to be counted, a decision in record time I might add, the decision made, is to be blunt, complete bullshit.
1. EC admits it wasn't an authorized advanced ballot.
2. Rules were not followed, EC rules at that, in regards to scrutineers.
3. Partisan material was within the ballot box, another EC no-no.
4. Two seals were affixed to one ballot box, the top seal bearing #1030701 and the bottom seal bearing #1030702?
So what exactly is the reason to even have Elections Canada rules? When something occurs outside the bounds of said rules, Elections Canada say it's OK anyway? And we don't even know if those who cast votes at the University of Guelph even met EC's rules for being eligible to vote at that riding's unauthorized poll.
Oops, never mind. Elections Canada. The new Adscam. Where every rule in the book is broken, with Marc Mayrand and his underlings held unaccountable.
Only in Canada. Pity.
1. EC admits it wasn't an authorized advanced ballot.
2. Rules were not followed, EC rules at that, in regards to scrutineers.
3. Partisan material was within the ballot box, another EC no-no.
4. Two seals were affixed to one ballot box, the top seal bearing #1030701 and the bottom seal bearing #1030702?
So what exactly is the reason to even have Elections Canada rules? When something occurs outside the bounds of said rules, Elections Canada say it's OK anyway? And we don't even know if those who cast votes at the University of Guelph even met EC's rules for being eligible to vote at that riding's unauthorized poll.
Oops, never mind. Elections Canada. The new Adscam. Where every rule in the book is broken, with Marc Mayrand and his underlings held unaccountable.
Only in Canada. Pity.
Advance Poll At My House This Weekend...
Just wanted to give everyone a heads up I'm holding an advance poll at my house Saturday and Sunday. While it's not actually a poll approved by Elections Canada, I'm sure they will follow the precedent set at the University of Guelph, who held an advance poll earlier this week. While not approved, Elections Canada say hey, what the hell, the votes count anyways.
I want to let Elections Canada know they can be 100% rest assured that there will be no NDP partisan campaign literature near the polling station, as I live in Ajax and apparently the NDP candidate is looking to debate and door knock in the Caribbean at the present time.
Luckily I kept the shoebox my Air Jordan's came in. This will be used as the "special ballot box", as it already bears the number of my shoes on it. I've also decided to simplify voting. All ballots will be pre-filled with an "x" beside the Conservative candidates name. I'm not sure if the EC officer is available on the weekend so my trusty dog Sparky will be keeping a close eye on the proceedings.
Over to you Mr. Mayrand.
I want to let Elections Canada know they can be 100% rest assured that there will be no NDP partisan campaign literature near the polling station, as I live in Ajax and apparently the NDP candidate is looking to debate and door knock in the Caribbean at the present time.
Luckily I kept the shoebox my Air Jordan's came in. This will be used as the "special ballot box", as it already bears the number of my shoes on it. I've also decided to simplify voting. All ballots will be pre-filled with an "x" beside the Conservative candidates name. I'm not sure if the EC officer is available on the weekend so my trusty dog Sparky will be keeping a close eye on the proceedings.
Over to you Mr. Mayrand.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Mark Holland Looking To Replace Michael Ignatieff After Election?
The following is a letter to the editor of the News Advertiser Ajax, concerning Liberal candidate Mark Holland:
"To the editor:
I've never met Mark Holland but by all accounts he appears to be a decent, hard-working politician.
That said, when his canvassers came to my door a couple of days ago I told them that although I liked Mr. Holland, I just could not bring myself to vote Liberal so long as Mr. Ignattief was their leader.
A fellow canvasser overheard my comments while at a neighbour's door and came over to tell me that Mark was thinking of running for leader should things go wrong for them in this election, and that we should vote for him to 'keep him around' should that be the case.
This person introduced himself to me and I have to believe the comment is true. It might be something that Mr. Holland would like to clarify in order that people know just exactly who they are voting for this time and why. Is he an ambitious politician who just wants to hang around for when the leadership is up for grabs, or is he someone who has the best interests of Ajax and Pickering at heart?
Derek XXXXXXX
Ajax
"To the editor:
I've never met Mark Holland but by all accounts he appears to be a decent, hard-working politician.
That said, when his canvassers came to my door a couple of days ago I told them that although I liked Mr. Holland, I just could not bring myself to vote Liberal so long as Mr. Ignattief was their leader.
A fellow canvasser overheard my comments while at a neighbour's door and came over to tell me that Mark was thinking of running for leader should things go wrong for them in this election, and that we should vote for him to 'keep him around' should that be the case.
This person introduced himself to me and I have to believe the comment is true. It might be something that Mr. Holland would like to clarify in order that people know just exactly who they are voting for this time and why. Is he an ambitious politician who just wants to hang around for when the leadership is up for grabs, or is he someone who has the best interests of Ajax and Pickering at heart?
Derek XXXXXXX
Ajax
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Ignatieff Has Now Attended 50% Of The Debates, Surpassing His Record of Voting Attendance In Parliament...
Atta boy Jack. Show Canadians your the second best choice for PM behind Stephen Harper. So I guess Ignatieff was a master at giving lectures at Harvard. Cause he sure didn't look like a master debater.
Ignatieff Scores Knockout On Harper In Debate
There you have it. The english debate has yet to begin at the time of writing, but I'm guessing this will be the headline in the media tommorrow. Do I think Ignatieff will score a knockout? No. I don't think he will even be declared the winner of the debate by most Canadians.
So why my prediction of that headline? Looking over the first two weeks of the campaign, more importantly, media reporting of the campaign, even if Ignatieff wet himself and rolled up in the fetal position in the corner the regular Liberal lackies will still somehow spin it into a win for Ignatieff.
So why my prediction of that headline? Looking over the first two weeks of the campaign, more importantly, media reporting of the campaign, even if Ignatieff wet himself and rolled up in the fetal position in the corner the regular Liberal lackies will still somehow spin it into a win for Ignatieff.
Monday, April 11, 2011
A Quite Funny Look Into The Mind Of A Liberal Supporter...
One of the websites I like to check each day is http://www.electionprediction.org/2009_fed/index.php
I like the fact you can look at each individual riding, including current candidates and margins of victory for past elections. What I really like is people can post comments on each riding, including their prediction of who will win that riding in the 2011 federal election. Living in the riding of Ajax-Pickering, I am hoping for Conservative candidate Chris Alexander to unseat Liberal incumbent Mark Holland. And I came across this gem of a comment posted by someone named Diane, a Liberal supporter. Diane seems to think Alexander is unfit to be an MP in Parliament. Fair enough. But read the comment yourself and tell me what person could be inserted in place of Alexander, and still have her comment make some sense. I'm not sure if this person is partisanly blind or ignorant of the facts concerning the person whose name I bet you guess:
" To be now parachuted into Ajax-Pickering with no Canadian political history and no roots or history to the area, he will not be successful. His knowledge of Afghanistan may be extensive, but Canada is NOT the Country of Afghanistan or Russia for that matter. He may have ideas how Afghanistan may improve as he continues on a Canada wide panel to build support for a ‘new mission’ in Afghanistan Post 2011, which I would suggest he continue on that path as he did declare himself a 'Career Diplomat' upon his graduation from university. His recent comment about 'no poverty in Canada', further confirms his living and being employed outside of Canada from 1993 to 2009 is he's clearly out of touch of Canadian reality. Thanks, But No Thanks
I like the fact you can look at each individual riding, including current candidates and margins of victory for past elections. What I really like is people can post comments on each riding, including their prediction of who will win that riding in the 2011 federal election. Living in the riding of Ajax-Pickering, I am hoping for Conservative candidate Chris Alexander to unseat Liberal incumbent Mark Holland. And I came across this gem of a comment posted by someone named Diane, a Liberal supporter. Diane seems to think Alexander is unfit to be an MP in Parliament. Fair enough. But read the comment yourself and tell me what person could be inserted in place of Alexander, and still have her comment make some sense. I'm not sure if this person is partisanly blind or ignorant of the facts concerning the person whose name I bet you guess:
" To be now parachuted into Ajax-Pickering with no Canadian political history and no roots or history to the area, he will not be successful. His knowledge of Afghanistan may be extensive, but Canada is NOT the Country of Afghanistan or Russia for that matter. He may have ideas how Afghanistan may improve as he continues on a Canada wide panel to build support for a ‘new mission’ in Afghanistan Post 2011, which I would suggest he continue on that path as he did declare himself a 'Career Diplomat' upon his graduation from university. His recent comment about 'no poverty in Canada', further confirms his living and being employed outside of Canada from 1993 to 2009 is he's clearly out of touch of Canadian reality. Thanks, But No Thanks
Sunday, April 10, 2011
This Is Why They Screen People At The PM's Rallies
So a family member of mine was one of the people handling the registration and sign-in for the PM's appearance in Ajax last week, which by the way was a huge success. A man came up to the registration table wanting to get in. He was asked if he had pre-registered and he stated no. It was pointed out that all the advertising for the event stated you had to be pre-registered to attend. The man became agitated, stating he had just driven from Etobicoke (no, it wasn't Michael Ignatieff), and wanted to get in. The person tried to accomodate him, telling him that the room was already at capacity, but she would get him in, asking for photo id. Said person stated he had no photo-id. Person was asked for a piece of id without a photo, again stating he had none. He was then asked why he would drive all the way from Etobicoke with no drivers license, which he couldn't answer.
He was told he would not be able to attend, and walked away cursing. The security near the registration alerted Durham Regional Police, who stopped the man in the parking lot. Surprisingly, the man was able to provide id to the police when asked. He was then escorted off the property.
So what was this person's motive for wanting to attend? Denying he had id on him when in fact he did? Was he there as a voter or a plant from another party sent to disrupt a high profile event featuring the PM? Guess we will never know.
He was told he would not be able to attend, and walked away cursing. The security near the registration alerted Durham Regional Police, who stopped the man in the parking lot. Surprisingly, the man was able to provide id to the police when asked. He was then escorted off the property.
So what was this person's motive for wanting to attend? Denying he had id on him when in fact he did? Was he there as a voter or a plant from another party sent to disrupt a high profile event featuring the PM? Guess we will never know.
Mark Holland Accidently Disses Ignatieff On Question Period..
Interesting exchange between Mark Holland and Chris Alexander on Question Period today. Holland went out of his way to point out that he lived in the Ajax-Pickering riding his entire life, although as Alexander pointed out there is some debate about that (future post to come when info is verified). Conservative candidate Chris Alexander pointed out both he and Holland moved into the riding around the same time in 2004. Again Holland reiterated that he lived his entire life in the riding, implying he was a better candidate for MP because of it.
So what to make of Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff then? As has been pointed out recently, Ignatieff doesn't even live in the riding he was elected to represent in Parliament. How does Mark Holland feel about this? Or will he argue about electoral riding boundaries (which will be the subject of above mentioned future post) as a way around Ignatieff's failure to live in his own riding?
It's also worth mentioning Holland has contradicted the Liberal leader the past week on such things as crime bills. The fact is Holland supported Gerard Kennedy for Liberal leader, then switched his support to Stephane Dion when Kennedy dropped out of the race for Liberal leader. Is Holland now loyal to Ignatieff, or some fella named Bob?
So what to make of Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff then? As has been pointed out recently, Ignatieff doesn't even live in the riding he was elected to represent in Parliament. How does Mark Holland feel about this? Or will he argue about electoral riding boundaries (which will be the subject of above mentioned future post) as a way around Ignatieff's failure to live in his own riding?
It's also worth mentioning Holland has contradicted the Liberal leader the past week on such things as crime bills. The fact is Holland supported Gerard Kennedy for Liberal leader, then switched his support to Stephane Dion when Kennedy dropped out of the race for Liberal leader. Is Holland now loyal to Ignatieff, or some fella named Bob?
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Why Is The Media Lying About The Conservative Campaign Events
Since the start of the election, we have seen one thing consistent. The medias reporting of Conservative rally's attended by PM Stephen Harper. Led by the duo of CBC's Terry Milewski and CTV's Roger Smith, we keep hearing how the PM looks angry, they are running a poor campaign, PM lacks energy, understating attendance numbers, blah, blah, blah.
The problem is this is factually untrue, and both Milewski and Smith know it. I attended the Ajax rally on Thursday. Over 1000 people attended, with the official number being closer to 1300. Packed room, lots of energy, PM was fantastic, lauding the Tory platform, as well as tossing some humour into his speech.
Joanne at Blue Like You attended the Kitchener rally, and reported the same thing. PM full of energy, crowd loved the event, etc. Jean Lapierre mentioned a Quebec rally with record numbers, comparing it to the crowds Mulroney drew in 1988. Other posters on various blogs that have attended Conservative rallies have a similar story.
Yet the ongoing narrative in the media, led by CTV and CBC is how bad the Conservative campaign has been. If one looks at any of the polls, Nanos, Ipsos, Ekos, the Conservatives enjoy a comfortable lead of anywhere between 9-15 points. In my previous post I pointed out Global TV taking the latest Ipsos poll showing a 15 point Conservative lead, and painting it as a sign things were going great for the Liberals and bad for the Conservatives.
So why is the msm being so dishonest? Is it because they want a closer race to get more viewers? Is it the fact their left-wing bias is really starting to show? Or is it a sign of the growing desperation of the three coalition parties, the ones all wearing an engagement ring but denying their plans to wed?
I'm guessing if we did a poll it would be all of the above.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Global TV Masters The Art Of Making a 15 Point Conservative Lead Look Good For The Liberals....
Compare For Yourself.
Ipsos Press Release: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5192
Global Article: http://www.globalnews.ca/Liberals+gaining+Tories+stay/4584984/story.html
A few examples:
1) Ipsos-"The results represent only a marginal change from the poll released by Ipsos Reid at the outset of the campaign."
Global-"The Liberals have gained ground in the election campaign while the Tories have slipped, but the Tories are still on top by a wide margin, according to a new survey
2) Ipsos-"What continues to drive the high-flying Tories in the overall national support are their numbers in Ontario"
Global-"The Tories remain strong nationally because of their numbers in Ontario"
3)Ipsos-"Two in ten (21%) say their impression of Michael Ignatieff has worsened, roughly equalling the proportion of Canadians who say their impressions have improved (20%), representing a net drop of 1 point. A majority’s (54%) impressions remain unchanged, and 5% don’t know."
Global- Ignatieff turns corner with voters-"The news is better for Ignatieff on that front. It seems he might be turning the corner with Canadians, as the proportion of those whose impressions have worsened (21 per cent) roughly equals the proportion of Canadians who say their impression has improved (20 per cent). A majority’s (54 per cent) impressions remain unchanged, and five per cent don’t know"
4) Ipsos-"But the national vote numbers could yield a ‘ballot box bonus’ for the Conservatives and deliver them their coveted majority if vote certainty turnout holds: currently, 56% of Canadians say that they are ‘absolutely certain’ to go out and vote on Election Day and if this represented the actual vote turnout the adjusted polling numbers suggest Conservative support would rise to 44%(+3),
Global-"If all the Canadians now promising to vote (56 per cent) did, in fact, cast their ballots on election day, Tory support would rise to 44 per cent, while support for the Liberals would be 26 per cent, the NDP vote would yield 18 per cent and the Green Party would receive four per cent"
So lets recap.
1) Marginal change means Liberal gain, Conservative drop (I won't even mention the margin of error is 3.1 percentage points).
2. High flying Tories national numbers means numbers seem strong because of Ontario polling. Forget the fact they lead in almost every region except Quebec, where they are in 2nd or 3rd depending on the pollster.
3. Apparently having Canadians impression of Ignatieff drop one percent is turning the corner.
4) No mention of majority, no mention of the 56% absolutely cetain of voting.
Nuff said.
Ipsos Press Release: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5192
Global Article: http://www.globalnews.ca/Liberals+gaining+Tories+stay/4584984/story.html
A few examples:
1) Ipsos-"The results represent only a marginal change from the poll released by Ipsos Reid at the outset of the campaign."
Global-"The Liberals have gained ground in the election campaign while the Tories have slipped, but the Tories are still on top by a wide margin, according to a new survey
2) Ipsos-"What continues to drive the high-flying Tories in the overall national support are their numbers in Ontario"
Global-"The Tories remain strong nationally because of their numbers in Ontario"
3)Ipsos-"Two in ten (21%) say their impression of Michael Ignatieff has worsened, roughly equalling the proportion of Canadians who say their impressions have improved (20%), representing a net drop of 1 point. A majority’s (54%) impressions remain unchanged, and 5% don’t know."
Global- Ignatieff turns corner with voters-"The news is better for Ignatieff on that front. It seems he might be turning the corner with Canadians, as the proportion of those whose impressions have worsened (21 per cent) roughly equals the proportion of Canadians who say their impression has improved (20 per cent). A majority’s (54 per cent) impressions remain unchanged, and five per cent don’t know"
4) Ipsos-"But the national vote numbers could yield a ‘ballot box bonus’ for the Conservatives and deliver them their coveted majority if vote certainty turnout holds: currently, 56% of Canadians say that they are ‘absolutely certain’ to go out and vote on Election Day and if this represented the actual vote turnout the adjusted polling numbers suggest Conservative support would rise to 44%(+3),
Global-"If all the Canadians now promising to vote (56 per cent) did, in fact, cast their ballots on election day, Tory support would rise to 44 per cent, while support for the Liberals would be 26 per cent, the NDP vote would yield 18 per cent and the Green Party would receive four per cent"
So lets recap.
1) Marginal change means Liberal gain, Conservative drop (I won't even mention the margin of error is 3.1 percentage points).
2. High flying Tories national numbers means numbers seem strong because of Ontario polling. Forget the fact they lead in almost every region except Quebec, where they are in 2nd or 3rd depending on the pollster.
3. Apparently having Canadians impression of Ignatieff drop one percent is turning the corner.
4) No mention of majority, no mention of the 56% absolutely cetain of voting.
Nuff said.
Just Insert Michael Ignatieff Instead Of Stephane Dion, And It Still Makes Sense.
So Ignatieff today complaining the Harper government hasn't increased health care spending by one cent above the six-percent agreement signed in 2004. A couple of problems with that argument. Number one is the fact the Conservatives have announced spending for various health-care initiatives over the course of the last five years. Number two federal transfers to the provinces have increased under the federal government, with some of that money being used by the provinces and territories for health care.
But what makes Ignatieff's comments all the more ridiculous is the fact he never learned anything from his predecessor, Stephane Dion. Dion also complained about health care spending, ignoring the fact his party under Paul Martin, and every premier and health minister of each province and territory signed the deal. It was funny to watch the Conservatives pointing this out to Dion, and more importantly, Canadians. So without further ado, here is a 2007 Conservative press release. It's great to see that it still makes sense today, with the only editing necessary is changing Stephane Dion to Michael Ignatieff.
"OTTAWA – Liberal leader Stephane Dion told a town hall meeting in Edmonton last night that Canada's health care system faces a crisis in the next few years (Broadcast News, January 12, 2007). But wait, didn’t Paul Martin and the Liberals claim that they had ‘fixed health care for a generation’ only two years ago?:
"We're finished with the year-to-year scramble for short-term solutions," he said. "We will provide a fix for a generation." – Paul Martin (Ottawa Citizen, April 17, 2004)
"Health care is this government's No. 1 priority. We will come to an agreement with the provinces, because we must. We will implement a long-term plan, because we must. And because we must, we will provide a fix for a generation.'' – Paul Martin (Winnipeg Free Press, April 18, 2004)
“I'm very proud of this reform, and I am going to fight for this reform, and I believe that this is the reform that is going to give us the fix for a generation” – Paul Martin (CBC, The National, May 25, 2004)
"I believe that this reform is going to give us the fix for a generation," – Paul Martin (Ottawa Sun, May 26, 2004)
Is Stephane Dion saying that Paul Martin wasn’t telling Canadians the truth when he claimed that he had fixed health care “for a generation?
But what makes Ignatieff's comments all the more ridiculous is the fact he never learned anything from his predecessor, Stephane Dion. Dion also complained about health care spending, ignoring the fact his party under Paul Martin, and every premier and health minister of each province and territory signed the deal. It was funny to watch the Conservatives pointing this out to Dion, and more importantly, Canadians. So without further ado, here is a 2007 Conservative press release. It's great to see that it still makes sense today, with the only editing necessary is changing Stephane Dion to Michael Ignatieff.
"OTTAWA – Liberal leader Stephane Dion told a town hall meeting in Edmonton last night that Canada's health care system faces a crisis in the next few years (Broadcast News, January 12, 2007). But wait, didn’t Paul Martin and the Liberals claim that they had ‘fixed health care for a generation’ only two years ago?:
"We're finished with the year-to-year scramble for short-term solutions," he said. "We will provide a fix for a generation." – Paul Martin (Ottawa Citizen, April 17, 2004)
"Health care is this government's No. 1 priority. We will come to an agreement with the provinces, because we must. We will implement a long-term plan, because we must. And because we must, we will provide a fix for a generation.'' – Paul Martin (Winnipeg Free Press, April 18, 2004)
“I'm very proud of this reform, and I am going to fight for this reform, and I believe that this is the reform that is going to give us the fix for a generation” – Paul Martin (CBC, The National, May 25, 2004)
"I believe that this reform is going to give us the fix for a generation," – Paul Martin (Ottawa Sun, May 26, 2004)
Is Stephane Dion saying that Paul Martin wasn’t telling Canadians the truth when he claimed that he had fixed health care “for a generation?
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Play The Ignatieff Lottery- Be One Of 200,000 Canadians To Lose Your Job...
"“By raising the (corporate tax) rate we’ll lose $50 billion in capital spending over the long run and we will also lose 200,000 jobs,” Mintz is quoted as saying from a broadcast of the Rutherford Show on April 1, 2011. “It’s just such a bad policy to advocate."
All because Ignatieff and the Liberals can't win the election, so have abandoned their long-standing support of corporate tax cuts as a way of growing the economy, including jobs and tax revenue. All in the name of making Jack and Gilles very happy.
All because Ignatieff and the Liberals can't win the election, so have abandoned their long-standing support of corporate tax cuts as a way of growing the economy, including jobs and tax revenue. All in the name of making Jack and Gilles very happy.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Ignatieff Plagiarized Obama Campaign Ad? You Tell Me...
So the Liberals are trying to spin the newest Conservative ad, which is not an attack ad, as being plagiarized from a Tea Party Ad. Seems both ads feature the respective National Flags. Who would think a campaign ad would have a shot of the countries flag. Both feature various shots of scenery from each country, as well as film clips of the countries history. Sure, I guess this is the first time any party in the history of politics thought to use those items in a campaign ad. And of course the media laps it all up.
So following that same storyline, let's compare an Ignatieff ad from 2011 with a Obama ad from the last U.S. election. Wanna bet any of the Canadian media report on it? I doubt it.
So following that same storyline, let's compare an Ignatieff ad from 2011 with a Obama ad from the last U.S. election. Wanna bet any of the Canadian media report on it? I doubt it.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Elect Chris Alexander MP For Ajax-Pickering Send Mark Holland Packing...
One week into the campaign and Conservative candidate Chris Alexander has had an incredible response to his campaign. Almost all the signs are gone. If you can provide either a small donation or volunteer some of your time for the campaign, please contact Mr. Alexander's office at:
Ajax-Pickering Conservative Association
520 Westney Road South
Ajax Ontario
905-231-1579
The easiest way to get to the campaign office is 401 south on Westney Road. Roughly 4 blocks south.
Donations can also be sent to:
Ajax-Pickering Conservative Association
PO Box 31060
Westney Heights Post Office
Ajax On L1T 3V2
Sunday Night Blues: BB King Thrill Is Gone
I've heard and seen hundreds of BB King performances of this song, but this one stands out as the best I've ever heard. This is what music from the soul really sounds like.
Non-Politics Sunday: Are 3D TV's A Worthwhile Investment?
I'm toying with the idea of buying a 3D television. I've heard both good and bad things about them, and not sure whether it's worth the additional cost compared to a LED TV. I've tried the demo 3D tv's in the store and was pretty impressed, but have to admit I'm not a big fan of wearing the glasses.
My biggest concern is the technology. Is 3D something that is really going to take off and be supported by software? You see, I'm the proud owner of a 1990's $1400 laser disc player, which in reality turned into a $1400 cd player roughly a year after I bought it. It still maintains it's spot in my audio rack as a sore fiscal reminder to research before buying, or rather think before impulse buying.
So does anyone presently own a 3d television or looked into buying one? Would appreciate any advice.
p.s. Laser disc player is for sale for $25, including 4 movies.
My biggest concern is the technology. Is 3D something that is really going to take off and be supported by software? You see, I'm the proud owner of a 1990's $1400 laser disc player, which in reality turned into a $1400 cd player roughly a year after I bought it. It still maintains it's spot in my audio rack as a sore fiscal reminder to research before buying, or rather think before impulse buying.
So does anyone presently own a 3d television or looked into buying one? Would appreciate any advice.
p.s. Laser disc player is for sale for $25, including 4 movies.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
CBC News Allows The 30 Day Anti-Harper Facebook Page?
http://www.facebook.com/pages/30-Day-Anti-Harper-Challenge/199706986728555
From the Facebook page:
"Forget the 30 day song, film, football and photo challenges... we only have 30 days to make sure Stephen Harper isn't elected as Prime Minister of Canada!
Join the fun and participate by submitting a daily update from April 3rd to May 2nd. By taking part in these easy activities and status updates, you can help keep Harper's party on its toes spread the 'go out at vote' message to all your friends and family."
So exactly who at CBC operates their facebook pages, and who is clicking "like" on all the anti-Conservative ones. This taxpayer would like to know.
From the Facebook page:
"Forget the 30 day song, film, football and photo challenges... we only have 30 days to make sure Stephen Harper isn't elected as Prime Minister of Canada!
Join the fun and participate by submitting a daily update from April 3rd to May 2nd. By taking part in these easy activities and status updates, you can help keep Harper's party on its toes spread the 'go out at vote' message to all your friends and family."
So exactly who at CBC operates their facebook pages, and who is clicking "like" on all the anti-Conservative ones. This taxpayer would like to know.
CBC's George Stroumboulopoulos Facebook Page Also Contains Links To Anti-Harper Websites..
I previously posted today on the Rick Mercer Report Facebook page containing links to Anti-Harper Facebook webpages. Many of those webpages appear to be run by the opposition parties, showing those who "like" the page to include Ignatieff, Layton, Duceppe, as well as a number of MP's from the opposition parties. The problem is these pages can be reached via CBC's own website. By clicking on personalities, you can then look for anyone appearing on CBC's profile, which usually includes a link to the Facebook page for that particular show or personality.
For instance, you can link to the Not Stephen Harper Facebook page via Stroumboulopoulos Facebook page. Here is the link:
http://www.facebook.com/strombo?ref=ts#!/pages/Not-Stephen-Harper-2011/199235506777501
Interesting looking at those who "like" that page. Among the notables are Duceppe, Layton, May, Trudeau, Mercer, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, various universities, etc.
So does the CBC see any problem in having links from it's website that direct viewers to anti-Conservative parties? If not, they should!
For instance, you can link to the Not Stephen Harper Facebook page via Stroumboulopoulos Facebook page. Here is the link:
http://www.facebook.com/strombo?ref=ts#!/pages/Not-Stephen-Harper-2011/199235506777501
Interesting looking at those who "like" that page. Among the notables are Duceppe, Layton, May, Trudeau, Mercer, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, various universities, etc.
So does the CBC see any problem in having links from it's website that direct viewers to anti-Conservative parties? If not, they should!
Globe and Mail Thinks BC Provincial Government Is Conservative???
Another example of the G&M's inability to get the facts right. Running a story about Layton's appearance in Nova Scotia today, the article references Layton being asked a question about the NDP provincial government in Nova Scotia also implementing the hst, something Layton has complained about in Ontario and BC but failed to mention until a reporter called him on it. The Globe then goes on to explain the Conservative government in BC implemented the hst there. Really? I had no idea the Conservatives were in government in BC.
"Mr. Layton didn’t mention the HST during his speech here in Nova Scotia where the NDP government has introduced the harmonized tax. Mr. Layton was deeply critical of the Conservative government in British Columbia and the Liberal government in Ontario for signing on to the HST. But NDP Premier Darrell Dexter on Nova Scotia has made sure that it was not applied to home heating, a measure that makes it acceptable, Mr. Layton told reporters."
when you can't get simple facts straight, why would anyone take your paper as being anywhere near credible?
"Mr. Layton didn’t mention the HST during his speech here in Nova Scotia where the NDP government has introduced the harmonized tax. Mr. Layton was deeply critical of the Conservative government in British Columbia and the Liberal government in Ontario for signing on to the HST. But NDP Premier Darrell Dexter on Nova Scotia has made sure that it was not applied to home heating, a measure that makes it acceptable, Mr. Layton told reporters."
when you can't get simple facts straight, why would anyone take your paper as being anywhere near credible?
CBC's Rick Mercer Report Facebook Page Links To Anti-Harper Groups? And Allows Disgusting Comments That Bash The PM And Conservatives?
Alberta Girl on Joanne's blog Blue Like You posted a link to this Facebook page.
https://www.facebook.com/strategicvoting
What's interesting is looking at who has marked that page as like. Ignatieff, Layton, May. Well I guess that makes sense as they are trying to team up to form a coalition government. The name that is surprising is Rick Mercer Report. The facebook page for the Mercer Report show televised on CBC, our national broadcaster that recieves $1 billion a year in taxpayer funds is pretty much a link for numerous anti-Harper websites and comments.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home&#!/pages/Rick-Mercer-Report/28103132195?sk=wall
Is this what CBC thinks is non-partisan advertising? While I'm sure the facebook page is not run by Mercer, but rather CBC employees on paid for with taxpayer funded salaries, does the CBC think it's really appropriate to have such links on comments on a webpage, especially during an election campaign?
I'm guessing the CBC is monitoring the Blogging Tories aggregator page as well as those of the other parties. Care to answer why this is being allowed on a page that links from the CBC.com webpage?
https://www.facebook.com/strategicvoting
What's interesting is looking at who has marked that page as like. Ignatieff, Layton, May. Well I guess that makes sense as they are trying to team up to form a coalition government. The name that is surprising is Rick Mercer Report. The facebook page for the Mercer Report show televised on CBC, our national broadcaster that recieves $1 billion a year in taxpayer funds is pretty much a link for numerous anti-Harper websites and comments.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home&#!/pages/Rick-Mercer-Report/28103132195?sk=wall
Is this what CBC thinks is non-partisan advertising? While I'm sure the facebook page is not run by Mercer, but rather CBC employees on paid for with taxpayer funded salaries, does the CBC think it's really appropriate to have such links on comments on a webpage, especially during an election campaign?
I'm guessing the CBC is monitoring the Blogging Tories aggregator page as well as those of the other parties. Care to answer why this is being allowed on a page that links from the CBC.com webpage?