Friday, October 23, 2009

Pension Crisis resonates with voters: Layton & the NDP getting it right


On the mark:

And more than any current issue -- more, clearly, than the mud-fight over giant novelty cheques and brass doorknobs -- the pension crisis resonates with voters.

Johnny come lately:
Meanwhile, some are calling on the government to revise the federal bankruptcy act so Nortel employees would become secured creditors, ahead of others owed money. (With the bad-timing he is becoming known for, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff belatedly jumped on this bandwagon at the protest rally.)

Layton and the NDP:

A cut above the "goodbye Charlie Brown" or Johnny come lately crowd on the right

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

LIBERALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT: “We didn’t get it done and neither should you”

Today Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff confirmed that his party will block passage of the NDP’s Climate Change Accountability Act (Bill C-311) later this afternoon by voting to send the legislation for unneeded “study” at a Parliamentary Committee.

In doing so, Mr. Ignatieff has decided to put politics ahead of the environment. Just because the Liberals didn't get the job done, now they don't want anyone else to.

That the Harper Conservatives would not want Canada to have legally binding and science-based environmental targets in advance of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December surprises no one.

But Mr. Ignatieff?

Just last week he told us: “We can’t afford the price of indifference….Climate change is not a distant abstraction. It’s here, and it’s hurting, right now…There is an imperative to act now…to tackle climate change.” – Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, Speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade, October 13, 2009

And what happened to change the mind of the Liberal environment critic who agreed with the NDP that Canada needs benchmarks in advance of Copenhagen?

“Parliamentarians don't know where this country is going, as a sovereign nation state, on climate change. The really good news and the good faith behind Bill C-311 is helping to prompt a timely debate of where we're going in advance of the important Copenhagen negotiation.” – David McGuinty, Environment Committee, June 18, 2009

And why do the Liberals suddenly believe C-311 needs “further study”, when they helped pass an identical Bill at third reading in the last Parliament?

“[Bill C-311] has been reintroduced under a new MP, a bill that was put forward in the last Parliament by the leader of the NDP. As such, it really has no material changes compared to its predecessor bill.” –David McGuinty, Hansard, March 4, 2009

Mr. Ignatieff famously told his predecessor, and former Environment Minster: “We didn’t get the job done.”

Today Mr. Ignatieff showed us how. When it comes to acting on the environment, the Liberal leader can’t even take his own advice:

“It’s very simple: we won’t be taken seriously until we are serious about the environment.” – Speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade, October 13, 2009

Take you seriously, indeed.

Again, Liberals just talk the talk but just never get around to walk that talk.

As mom use to say - empty barrels make the most noise!

Bookmark and Share

Friday, October 16, 2009

Tories prove that imitation is the sincerest form of Liberal flattery

Meet the new boss whose the same as the old boss
The gold standard for this government's definition of acceptable behaviour is now being set by past Liberals. Federal politics has been reduced to the pursuit of moral and ethical parity as the two governing parties seek a shady equilibrium to prepare for the next election. So far, they're perfectly matched.
Ain't that truth

Same old, same old ~ Liberal/Tory same old story

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Time for Canada to enter 21st century: NO SPANKING kids!

Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar MP Kelly Block calls spanking a "traditional punishment" and is asking her constituents to help her fight a Senate bill that would see parents charged for it.
spanking that often begins as well-meaning discipline too easily escalates into physical abuse -- often when parents get frustrated their spanking isn't effective.

An authoritative body of research has amassed, saying hitting children leads to an increased likelihood of injury, mental health problems, poor parent-child relationships, anti-social behaviour, bullying and violence toward spouses and peers when children become adults, Bernstein said.

Research also indicates the more corporal punishment a child experiences, the less likely they are to graduate from college or to be in the top 20 per cent of income earners in the country.

Another recent U.S. study found children aged two to nine who were spanked lagged several IQ points behind their peers who are not spanked.

"Being hit, for a young child . . . is a traumatic experience that causes stress, that disrupts the cognitive skills and impedes learning," Bernstein said.

Bottom line (and not the bottom!):
research suggesting spanking is effective in teaching children about proper behaviour or boundaries.
Enter 21st Century Canada:
  • government should repeal Section 43 of the code, as previously recommended by a Senate committee on human rights.
  • Twenty-four other countries have already outlawed corporal punishment
  • Canada is also a signatory to an international treaty on rights of the child that states children should not be physically harmed, Bernstein said. In 2003, international observers rebuked Canada for not following that provision of the treaty
  • important to distinguish between spanking and discipline
Spare the rod and spoil the child:
spanking isn't discipline. It doesn't teach the child anything. It doesn't give the child any knowledge to use next time, except for fear of being hit again."

Bookmark and Share

Monday, October 05, 2009

Playing along ~ "With a little help from our friends"

Strolling down penny lane....

Althia Raj @ Eye on the Hill
"With a little help from our friends"


Shorter: ... but could it have been a stab at his opponent, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff?

A few years ago, Ignatieff took issue with an essay by Conor Gearty, a professor of Human Rights Law at the London School of Economics, had written mentioning him. Gearty's article described how liberal intellectuals had helped justify the use of torture. According to this article, which was sent to the Ottawa press gallery a few months ago, "Ignatieff's response was as violent as it was unexpected. The harm done to his reputation by the article he insisted, was so great that it could not even be remedied by the chance to rebut. He had no alternative but to resign immediately from the editorial and advisory board of the magazine and request that any syndication of the Gearty's piece be withheld."
The title of the essay published in Index on Censorship was "With a little help from our friends: Torture is wrong and ineffective. So why is it making a comeback?"
Nay, way too off key - and missing the right beat?

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, October 03, 2009

Buy American VS Canadian Lives? That's no trade off

TorStar puff piece, Change of course on Afghanistan could be political toxic for Tories

Tradeoff for Liberals: Canadian body bags for American Coin
Mr. Travers advises the Liberals to take advantage of "... a popular way to differentiate themselves from Conservatives ...".

In other words, political advantage trumps the merits of the mission and Canada's international role. How does the columnist reconcile his advice with what the Liberal leader said to the Canadian Club of Ottawa: “Our Canada will play a role in Afghanistan after 2011. A different role focusing on a humanitarian commitment to help rebuild the country and strengthen hard-won gains”?
Reminder 1
"Ignatieff has already stated that he WILL keep Canadian troops in Afganistan past their return date in 2011."
Reminder 2
It was the Liberals in power who sent Canadians to Afghanistan, joined hands with the Harper Conservatives to extend the mission. Who can forget Harper shaking Iggy's hand for the Canadian Imperialistic moment of rapture.

So are Liberals willing to trade Canadians lives for US coin? It would appear so as their Leader has already signaled the Liberal position of Afghanistan.

Advice for Jack and the NDP
It's very clear on the back concession of Canadian farm country as well as our urban streets. What are we doing in Afghanistan! No Canadians should be dying there! A trade off for "buy American."
The faster we're out of there the better and if I'm Jack Layton I'm saying that every time a microphone is in front of me.

Calling Jack

Out of Afghanistan NOW - Buy American vs Canadian lives? That's no trade off. We don't barter Canadian lives for trade deals - period.

Thank you commenters at Torstar for saying it like it is. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Bookmark and Share