How interesting. Harper now wants to claim libel over the Chuck Cadman bribery affair.
As is typical for a micromanager, he wants to control everything, and when something starts to get out of his control the first tool he reaches for is the threat of libel action.
He doesn't come clean on the issue, he doesn't provide a sane explanation for the events that are apparently so well documented. No, instead, we find Harper pulling from the Lyin' Brian toolbox, and threatening lawsuits. This coming from a man who spent much of the previous election promising Canadians a more open, honest, accountable government, and has delivered Truly Awful Government instead.
If we wish to talk about libel, perhaps we should be taking a closer look at the 'attack ads' that Harper's bunker has been lobbing at Dion.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Craig Chandler Campaign Literature
Chandler's campaign literature is an amazing collection of logical contradictions.
Of course, the contradictions stem from Chandler's blithe assumption that the only "kind" of voter that lives in Calgary Egmont is a "conservative voter".
Consider the following:
Followed a paragraph or so later:
So...just how does this man think he's going to represent the moderate voters, which are fiscally moderate and socially quite liberal? Or perhaps he has forgotten that many in this province today are old enough to remember Peter Lougheed's government - and that represents the "roots" of the PC party far more than the absolutist conservatism of the federal Reform Party. I suspect that many of the points on his policy page are "code phrases" that only bear meaning for people that subscribe to Stephen Harper's dishonest social conservatism backed and defined by Charles McVety and his allies - meaning that there are quite likely a lot of issues which are not "open for consultation", unless I miss my guess. (Or conveniently, all he'll hear are opinions that match his own - not unlike )
Of course, he also likes to claim that he is the "trigger" of a "great exodus" from the Alberta PC party. If there's an exodus of any sort happening, it's likely got more to do with a lot of people turning away from the party after starting to realize that the leadership selection process was not what it was represented to be. I'm sure that for a few, Chandler's nomination was the "straw that broke the camel's back", but Chandler just isn't that significant a figure outside of Egmont - and only there because he's chosen to try and be a candidate there.
Last, and perhaps most telling is the bottom of the page - which contains not a picture of the Candidate, or any kind of slogans, but instead appears to have been sold off to supporters as paid advertising space. (One of the ads belongs to one Vicki Engel, who I suspected was a little to cozy with Chandler to be anything other than a puppet candidate. While some might applaud Chandler's "innovation" in selling advertising space on his campaign advertising, it also sends a rather worrisome message - namely that he is for sale to the highest bidder.
Of course, the contradictions stem from Chandler's blithe assumption that the only "kind" of voter that lives in Calgary Egmont is a "conservative voter".
Consider the following:
If you hire me as your MLA, I understand that I report to you and that your views will be represented
Followed a paragraph or so later:
As your MLA, my intention is to vote with the PCs when they act like conservatives, and when they act like Liberals, I will remind them of their roots
So...just how does this man think he's going to represent the moderate voters, which are fiscally moderate and socially quite liberal? Or perhaps he has forgotten that many in this province today are old enough to remember Peter Lougheed's government - and that represents the "roots" of the PC party far more than the absolutist conservatism of the federal Reform Party. I suspect that many of the points on his policy page are "code phrases" that only bear meaning for people that subscribe to Stephen Harper's dishonest social conservatism backed and defined by Charles McVety and his allies - meaning that there are quite likely a lot of issues which are not "open for consultation", unless I miss my guess. (Or conveniently, all he'll hear are opinions that match his own - not unlike )
Of course, he also likes to claim that he is the "trigger" of a "great exodus" from the Alberta PC party. If there's an exodus of any sort happening, it's likely got more to do with a lot of people turning away from the party after starting to realize that the leadership selection process was not what it was represented to be. I'm sure that for a few, Chandler's nomination was the "straw that broke the camel's back", but Chandler just isn't that significant a figure outside of Egmont - and only there because he's chosen to try and be a candidate there.
Last, and perhaps most telling is the bottom of the page - which contains not a picture of the Candidate, or any kind of slogans, but instead appears to have been sold off to supporters as paid advertising space. (One of the ads belongs to one Vicki Engel, who I suspected was a little to cozy with Chandler to be anything other than a puppet candidate. While some might applaud Chandler's "innovation" in selling advertising space on his campaign advertising, it also sends a rather worrisome message - namely that he is for sale to the highest bidder.
Straw Polling in Calgary Egmont and Fish Creek
I drove through the ridings of Calgary Egmont and Calgary Fish Creek this morning, and the "sign poll" was rather interesting.
Calgary Egmont is a riding which is going to be interesting on Monday night. It has an unusual number of candidates running in it - a total of six from various parties.
The real race here is between Jonathan Denis and Cathie Williams, with Craig Chandler doing his best to play spoiler - hoping to at the very least split the PC vote. It's obvious that Chandler's been running hard, and he certainly has a lot of lawn signs out there - if that translates into actual votes, Denis is in serious trouble, as it looks distinctly like Chandler may have taken quite a few of the PC votes away. (I'm sorry to say that I didn't see enough NDP or Green Party signs to suggest they are even factors in the vote this time around)
Of course, given that it's probably less than 10% of the homes that have signs in front of them, the undecided vote (estimated to be over 25% of voters still) is going to decide just what form change takes. Personally, my preference would be Cathie Williams in this race. Her leadership on the Calgary Catholic School Board was impressive, and she strikes me as being capable of being an even-handed, rational MLA.
Denis represents the status quo, and he seems to be a weak candidate in this race, with the PC party's organization having been well shook up by Chandler's machinations last year.
As for Chandler, he's demonstrated repeatedly by his actions that he represents nobody except himself. If you see things his way, great. If you dare differ with the man, don't expect to get much traction. His claims of "unifying" people are highly suspect when you recognize how quickly he switches his tune. Last fall, he was asking citizens to vote PC in the coming election; today, he's telling us to vote for him as an independent candidate? His past actions on a variety of fronts leaves me wondering just how well he's going to represent anyone other than himself.
Calgary Fish Creek is shaping up to be much more intriguing than I had expected. From the amount of signs on people's lawns, Heather Forsyth could be in serious trouble. Laura Shutiak has obviously been running a very aggressive campaign, and people are hearing it.
I personally lost a great deal of respect for Ms. Forsyth when I got her response to this letter I sent her - which more or less blew my concerns off as she had already decided to vote for Morton's bill to enshrine bigotry. Her response was essentially "piss off, I've already decided", instead of actually engaging the issues I raised about the legislation.
Sign wise, I'd say that Shutiak outnumbers Forsyth quite significantly, BUT, the number of signs overall is quite small - probably around 5% of homes at most. To me this suggests that there is a huge undecided vote in the area, and possibly a great deal of apathy as well.
Calgary Egmont is a riding which is going to be interesting on Monday night. It has an unusual number of candidates running in it - a total of six from various parties.
The real race here is between Jonathan Denis and Cathie Williams, with Craig Chandler doing his best to play spoiler - hoping to at the very least split the PC vote. It's obvious that Chandler's been running hard, and he certainly has a lot of lawn signs out there - if that translates into actual votes, Denis is in serious trouble, as it looks distinctly like Chandler may have taken quite a few of the PC votes away. (I'm sorry to say that I didn't see enough NDP or Green Party signs to suggest they are even factors in the vote this time around)
Of course, given that it's probably less than 10% of the homes that have signs in front of them, the undecided vote (estimated to be over 25% of voters still) is going to decide just what form change takes. Personally, my preference would be Cathie Williams in this race. Her leadership on the Calgary Catholic School Board was impressive, and she strikes me as being capable of being an even-handed, rational MLA.
Denis represents the status quo, and he seems to be a weak candidate in this race, with the PC party's organization having been well shook up by Chandler's machinations last year.
As for Chandler, he's demonstrated repeatedly by his actions that he represents nobody except himself. If you see things his way, great. If you dare differ with the man, don't expect to get much traction. His claims of "unifying" people are highly suspect when you recognize how quickly he switches his tune. Last fall, he was asking citizens to vote PC in the coming election; today, he's telling us to vote for him as an independent candidate? His past actions on a variety of fronts leaves me wondering just how well he's going to represent anyone other than himself.
Calgary Fish Creek is shaping up to be much more intriguing than I had expected. From the amount of signs on people's lawns, Heather Forsyth could be in serious trouble. Laura Shutiak has obviously been running a very aggressive campaign, and people are hearing it.
I personally lost a great deal of respect for Ms. Forsyth when I got her response to this letter I sent her - which more or less blew my concerns off as she had already decided to vote for Morton's bill to enshrine bigotry. Her response was essentially "piss off, I've already decided", instead of actually engaging the issues I raised about the legislation.
Sign wise, I'd say that Shutiak outnumbers Forsyth quite significantly, BUT, the number of signs overall is quite small - probably around 5% of homes at most. To me this suggests that there is a huge undecided vote in the area, and possibly a great deal of apathy as well.
Mark Steyn Lies, and Ezra Laps it up
I'm getting quite sick of hearing the utter bullshit coming out of clowns like Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant lately.
The latest claim is that Richard Warman has been involved in every Section 13 (Hate Messages) claim in the last few years. Of course, Ezra just has to parrot Steyn.
I'm pretty sure that there's at least one case that did not involve Mr. Warman - that was the complaint that Rob Wells filed against Craig Chandler for republishing Boissoin's letter on multiple websites. I suspect the real truth is that Warman doesn't respond well to being bullied, and will push an issue through the full process and hearings. Since Mr. Wells' complaint was resolved through the mediation process, it doesn't even turn up on Steyn's radar, so the logical fallacy eludes him.
At one point Steyn complains that a transsexual who complained about access to medical services is now working for the government on a study about transsexual health issues:
Hmmm...lessee - it's a bad thing to ask a transsexual to quantify the problems that transsexuals face accessing health care services how? While I would expect more than just that individual to be involved in the study, I can't imagine someone better qualified to give voice to the issues experienced by a small, and relatively obscure minority population.
Oh yes, and in a similar case in California where a hospital refused services to a transsexual woman because of her past, the hospital has changed its "policy".
Of course, to people like Steyn and Levant, denial of services that would otherwise be available to others isn't discrimination, is it? No, no they don't. They seem to be of the opinion that their beliefs are unassailable and beyond question.
The latest claim is that Richard Warman has been involved in every Section 13 (Hate Messages) claim in the last few years. Of course, Ezra just has to parrot Steyn.
I'm pretty sure that there's at least one case that did not involve Mr. Warman - that was the complaint that Rob Wells filed against Craig Chandler for republishing Boissoin's letter on multiple websites. I suspect the real truth is that Warman doesn't respond well to being bullied, and will push an issue through the full process and hearings. Since Mr. Wells' complaint was resolved through the mediation process, it doesn't even turn up on Steyn's radar, so the logical fallacy eludes him.
At one point Steyn complains that a transsexual who complained about access to medical services is now working for the government on a study about transsexual health issues:
"Human rights" plaintiffs are professional activists: since filing her complaint, the transsexual in the labiaplasty case has been given a government job investigating the health status of transsexuals.
Hmmm...lessee - it's a bad thing to ask a transsexual to quantify the problems that transsexuals face accessing health care services how? While I would expect more than just that individual to be involved in the study, I can't imagine someone better qualified to give voice to the issues experienced by a small, and relatively obscure minority population.
Oh yes, and in a similar case in California where a hospital refused services to a transsexual woman because of her past, the hospital has changed its "policy".
Of course, to people like Steyn and Levant, denial of services that would otherwise be available to others isn't discrimination, is it? No, no they don't. They seem to be of the opinion that their beliefs are unassailable and beyond question.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Alberta Election: The Cause for Change
Much of the election campaign in Alberta has been dancing around the subject of change in our government. After 37 odd years of one party rule, the question has to be asked if Stelmach's PCs are even capable of the kind of change needed to rejuvenate a seemingly moribund government in Alberta.
Looking around a few choice Calgary ridings, we have some really interesting races.
In Calgary Shaw, we have John Roggeveen running against Cindy Ady - an MLA whose only claim to fame is undocumented committee work that she refuses to to be accountable for. While John Roggeveen might be a relative unknown, replacing Cindy Ady can't be anything other than an improvement.
Over in Calgary Fort, the Liberals have Carole Oliver and the NDP has Julie Hrdlicka running against long-time MLA Wayne Cao. Like now retired MLA Denis Herard, Cao is a long time bench warmer MLA for Ralph Klein. Cao's been around a long time, but like most long term MLAs, he has long ago forgotten the reasons why he stood for office in the first place. After dutifully obeying Ralph's orders for so many years, we have a choice between two women who are fresh, engaged and aware of the issues in this riding, or Wayne Cao who has been entrenched so long that he believes his interests _ARE_ the ridings.
That's just a small sampling of the choices in Calgary. As voters, we have options - we can choose to re-elect the incumbent party, and live with four years of mediocre representation and a continuation of the same myopic governance that has left the province gasping for air, or we can look at options from other parties that are energetic, interested and engaged - and willing to represent all of the citizens in a constituency, not just their cronies.
Looking around a few choice Calgary ridings, we have some really interesting races.
In Calgary Shaw, we have John Roggeveen running against Cindy Ady - an MLA whose only claim to fame is undocumented committee work that she refuses to to be accountable for. While John Roggeveen might be a relative unknown, replacing Cindy Ady can't be anything other than an improvement.
Over in Calgary Fort, the Liberals have Carole Oliver and the NDP has Julie Hrdlicka running against long-time MLA Wayne Cao. Like now retired MLA Denis Herard, Cao is a long time bench warmer MLA for Ralph Klein. Cao's been around a long time, but like most long term MLAs, he has long ago forgotten the reasons why he stood for office in the first place. After dutifully obeying Ralph's orders for so many years, we have a choice between two women who are fresh, engaged and aware of the issues in this riding, or Wayne Cao who has been entrenched so long that he believes his interests _ARE_ the ridings.
That's just a small sampling of the choices in Calgary. As voters, we have options - we can choose to re-elect the incumbent party, and live with four years of mediocre representation and a continuation of the same myopic governance that has left the province gasping for air, or we can look at options from other parties that are energetic, interested and engaged - and willing to represent all of the citizens in a constituency, not just their cronies.
Abortion Is Racism?
Oh, I see. The latest meme out of the religious right wing (the same people who wish to argue that being gay is an acceptable reason to be shot) is that abortion is racist because it can be used as a form of ethnic population control.
Of course, like any technology, procedures like abortion can be used for both good and ill. To make his case, Coren cites a supposed telephone conversation between someone wanting to make a donation to Planned Parenthood that would be earmarked specifically for a patient based on their ethnicity.
Based on this, Coren figures that Abortion is just evil, and is being used for something approximating genocide. Lovely. That's about as logical as the twit I blogged about earlier today who tried to blame Larry King for getting himself shot. Whatever. The point around the abortion discussion is that a woman has control over her own body. If more black women wind up using abortions, perhaps what we should spend the time to understand why these abortions are happening (perhaps its a function of grinding poverty? Perhaps she (the woman) would find herself dreadfully beaten by her spouse if she became obviously pregnant? The reasons for someone seeking an abortion are many and not always trivial. Even if that money was officially "earmarked" in a way that seemed racist, it may end up doing a lot more good than Mr. Coren imagines - perhaps by allowing someone to keep their job, or survive just a little longer to escape an abusive partner with their existing children.
Of course, coming from the same lunkhead who called for dropping nukes on Iran, I'm not at all sure that Coren's moralizing position here means that much. Perhaps Mr. Coren would do better to pay attention to his own life, and get his nose out of the lives of others - especially when it's quite clear he's somewhat less capable of empathy than your average rock.
Of course, like any technology, procedures like abortion can be used for both good and ill. To make his case, Coren cites a supposed telephone conversation between someone wanting to make a donation to Planned Parenthood that would be earmarked specifically for a patient based on their ethnicity.
Based on this, Coren figures that Abortion is just evil, and is being used for something approximating genocide. Lovely. That's about as logical as the twit I blogged about earlier today who tried to blame Larry King for getting himself shot. Whatever. The point around the abortion discussion is that a woman has control over her own body. If more black women wind up using abortions, perhaps what we should spend the time to understand why these abortions are happening (perhaps its a function of grinding poverty? Perhaps she (the woman) would find herself dreadfully beaten by her spouse if she became obviously pregnant? The reasons for someone seeking an abortion are many and not always trivial. Even if that money was officially "earmarked" in a way that seemed racist, it may end up doing a lot more good than Mr. Coren imagines - perhaps by allowing someone to keep their job, or survive just a little longer to escape an abusive partner with their existing children.
Of course, coming from the same lunkhead who called for dropping nukes on Iran, I'm not at all sure that Coren's moralizing position here means that much. Perhaps Mr. Coren would do better to pay attention to his own life, and get his nose out of the lives of others - especially when it's quite clear he's somewhat less capable of empathy than your average rock.
The Burning Stupidity - Blame The Victim Edition
Just before Valentine's day this year, a gay youth named Larry King was murdered by a classmate. Deadly violence against GLBT youth is not unusual, but, Larry King's case seems to have attracted rather more attention in part because a classmate is the person who pulled the trigger.
As one might expect, the wingnuts are running about trying to blame the victim of the crime. Today's submission is a letter in the Ventura County Star newspaper, and it is an exceptionally vile piece of illogical crap.
Opening statements:
It turns out that Casa Pacifica is a shelter/counselling center for "seriously disturbed or at risk" youth and families. It appears to be quite similar to the William Roper Hull program in Calgary. Given what we know about Lawrence, it is not entirely shocking that he might be involved in such an environment.
The claims that young Mr. King was "abused" by GLBT activists is just plain nonsense. In the absence of any evidence to support such an assertion, it is a pathetic cop-out excuse that attempts to lay the blame for what happened to Larry at the feet of the minority population that he had just begun to recognize himself as part of.
Holy crap. So, Lawrence King's killer coming from a "broken home" somehow excuses his actions in taking a gun to school and shooting another student? I don't know what "god" the nut that wrote that worships, but it's not even close to the rather vengeful being described in the Old Testament. What we should be asking is just what kind of parent left a handgun somewhere that a fifteen year old could acquire it and sneak it out of the house in his schoolbag.
Screech! All Stop, right there! Yes, flamboyant behaviour in junior high is a good way to get ostracized, teased and bullied. Gay, Lesbian and Transgender youth who are "visible" at this age are subject to a kind of harassment that is uniquely vile. The real question here is why we tolerate the kind of bullying and abuse that is dealt to the "unpopular" kids in junior high school.
So, somehow, Lawrence being gay and apparently quite flamboyantly so somehow makes it alright that his killer shot him? At the age of fifteen, Lawrence is like any other adolescent, just starting sort out his identity and seek his niche in the adult world. That society is willing to vilify someone who is finding their identity is a sad statement; that Lawrence being openly gay should be seen as so threatening by others that they would decide that killing him is an acceptable course of action is positively depressing.
That we characterize someone's sexual identity if it's other than straight as "confused" is dishonest. The reality is that society's misguided, fear addled prohibitions against homosexuality (or, actually, anything other than reproductive sex) are the problem. We know now that being GLBT is a part of the human condition, unusual perhaps, but as real and ultimately normal as a lot of other things. Nothing, but nothing, justifies the violence and marginalization that these youth are subjected to.
It is part of the reason that articles like the one I critiqued a few days ago deserve to be taken apart, and shown for the utter stupidity that they represent.
Attempting to blame the victim of a murder, and those who are supportive of them for the murder is just plain vile.
As one might expect, the wingnuts are running about trying to blame the victim of the crime. Today's submission is a letter in the Ventura County Star newspaper, and it is an exceptionally vile piece of illogical crap.
Opening statements:
— Larry King was living at Casa Pacifica. It is very well-known, and The Star's article purposely "skirts" the reality and facts concerning this shelter.
— Larry was abused and manipulated by gay, bisexual, lesbian and transgender activists and their message of gender confusion, identity confusion and sexual confusion. Let's unmask the GBLT agenda for what it is: tolerance and celebration for sexual-identity confusion.
It turns out that Casa Pacifica is a shelter/counselling center for "seriously disturbed or at risk" youth and families. It appears to be quite similar to the William Roper Hull program in Calgary. Given what we know about Lawrence, it is not entirely shocking that he might be involved in such an environment.
The claims that young Mr. King was "abused" by GLBT activists is just plain nonsense. In the absence of any evidence to support such an assertion, it is a pathetic cop-out excuse that attempts to lay the blame for what happened to Larry at the feet of the minority population that he had just begun to recognize himself as part of.
— Brandon McInerney is a victim of a broken home life. The Star documented the facts very thoroughly here. To try him as an adult is cruel and unjust. This only further perpetuates the fact that we have abandoned our children.
Holy crap. So, Lawrence King's killer coming from a "broken home" somehow excuses his actions in taking a gun to school and shooting another student? I don't know what "god" the nut that wrote that worships, but it's not even close to the rather vengeful being described in the Old Testament. What we should be asking is just what kind of parent left a handgun somewhere that a fifteen year old could acquire it and sneak it out of the house in his schoolbag.
— Larry's sexual confusion manifested itself with flamboyant cross-dressing, which freaks out junior-high children. This invites ridicule and merciless teasing, a typical junior-high response.
Screech! All Stop, right there! Yes, flamboyant behaviour in junior high is a good way to get ostracized, teased and bullied. Gay, Lesbian and Transgender youth who are "visible" at this age are subject to a kind of harassment that is uniquely vile. The real question here is why we tolerate the kind of bullying and abuse that is dealt to the "unpopular" kids in junior high school.
— We live in a fallen world with a surrounding culture that is degenerating right before our eyes. Violence and sexual impropriety are now the norm. Values and virtues have been turned upside down.
So, somehow, Lawrence being gay and apparently quite flamboyantly so somehow makes it alright that his killer shot him? At the age of fifteen, Lawrence is like any other adolescent, just starting sort out his identity and seek his niche in the adult world. That society is willing to vilify someone who is finding their identity is a sad statement; that Lawrence being openly gay should be seen as so threatening by others that they would decide that killing him is an acceptable course of action is positively depressing.
One confusion leads to another confusion, and people take matters into their own hands.
However, there is a source for hope. His name is Jesus. We were not abandoned, but he came that we might have life.
That we characterize someone's sexual identity if it's other than straight as "confused" is dishonest. The reality is that society's misguided, fear addled prohibitions against homosexuality (or, actually, anything other than reproductive sex) are the problem. We know now that being GLBT is a part of the human condition, unusual perhaps, but as real and ultimately normal as a lot of other things. Nothing, but nothing, justifies the violence and marginalization that these youth are subjected to.
It is part of the reason that articles like the one I critiqued a few days ago deserve to be taken apart, and shown for the utter stupidity that they represent.
Attempting to blame the victim of a murder, and those who are supportive of them for the murder is just plain vile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)