More Rovian Crap From The PMO

Taking more plays from Karl "Turdblossom" Rove, the PMO starts on its next campaign of lies, deception and character assassination:

"The basic substance of the debate doesn't change," said Heritage Minister James Moore. "They're still part of a coalition with the Bloc Québécois and the NDP which remains unelected by Canadians."

Moore insisted "we're prepared to listen to them," but, asked if Conservatives could back specific budgetary proposals by the coalition such as eliminating a two-week waiting period for Employment Insurance benefits, he shrugged.

Right...this coming from a party whose leader is saying that he is willing to work with Ignatieff.

Rajotte said the Liberals don't need to wield the option of a coalition to exert leverage on the government. "The leverage (Ignatieff) has, the leverage all parties have, is that we (Conservatives) require at least one other party to support ... the budget at the end of January."

He added: "They've done some harm to the Liberal brand because a lot of Liberals across this country are not comfortable with the idea of forming a coalition with the Bloc Québécois and the NDP."

Bullfeathers. Rajotte is making assertions here ... and coming from a party who was courting the Bloc and NDP in 2004 to form a coalition, that smacks of plain hypocrisy. There's no way that a coalition is "valid an democratic" one day and suddenly becomes "undemocratic" the next - not unless you are being a two-faced liar.

I dare say that a lot of Liberals are more comfortable making alliance with the NDP and Bloc than with the Con$ - for the simple reason that the Con$ have proven time and again that they are all too eager to kick their opponents in the shins and higher at every opportunity.

A leopard does not change its spots, nor a tiger its strips. A snake may shed its skin, but pretty much the same pattern is always underneath - you can guess which one the Con$ really are as they slither their way through this parliamentary disaster they've created.

No Wonder The Big 3 Are Screwed

With this kind of brilliant advice.

Walter S. McManus, the head of the Automotive Analysis Division of the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, says he could see it coming.

"Brand loyalty is overrated," McManus stated flatly. "It is costly to do all the fuzzies, and Saturn's example is clear that it doesn't pay off for what is essentially an economy-car company. Women especially appreciated the Saturn way, but Honda sells more cars to women, despite having a less female-friendly approach."

Jeepers. What a pin-headed bit of logic. Honda isn't particularly 'female friendly' (any more than other car makes, really), but they've earned that market by producing cars that work. For a long time.

No, Honda's cars aren't the most exciting out there - but they work, they are well made and they've had a solid reputation for decades. Yes, the early models were - well - crude. But once they hit the mid-80s, the company hit its stride - especially with the Accords.

I can't count the number of people I work with whose first car was a Honda Civic, or they bought one for their daughter's first car (often with the thought that it was a reliable car that wouldn't strand their daughter somewhere in the dead of night).

Myself, I'm on my second Honda; my father is on his second (in fifteen years!) - brand loyalty isn't worth much? Horsefeathers. Chances are that I'll give whatever Honda has on the floor in another few years a serious look when I go to replace my current car. Why? Because the cars have treated me well, the service department at the dealership has been fair to me, and Honda has stood behind their product. Loyalty is earned.

Saturn set out on the right track in the late 80s - it was a lack of vision and persistence on GM's part that undermined the first initiative that company had which was going in the right direction. Those that I know that have owned Saturns have spoken well of their experiences with the dealers (in the early years), even if the car itself was "average" quality.

Dear Stupid Driver:

Let give you a hint - it's 06:00 and you're busy spinning your tires on the foot of snow that's out front of my house - you know who you are.

First up, let me remind you that your car's throttle is not a binary device - it has more than two states. Squeeze the throttle gently - you're not Fred Flintstone trying to stop in a hurry - in fact just slamming your foot to the floor is making things worse.

Second, as rhythmic as your abuse of the throttle was, it wasn't even as musical as the overpowered stereo the teenager down the street has in his car.

The whizzing sound was not the sound of sudden, gratifying acceleration - it was the sound of your bald tires polishing the ice to a nice shine which would make any Zamboni operator proud.

Lastly, if you really are that stuck, get out and push - or better yet, park your car and take the bus until spring. Seriously - you'd be doing the rest of us a favour.

Stephen "Janus" Harper Speaks

Talk about speaking out of both sides your face. Harper in today's interview on CBC opens his mouth and proves that he's the most two-faced politician walking Canada's soil today.

On one hand, he tries to sound oh-so-reasonable:

Until then, Harper repeated his invitation to the opposition parties to offer specific suggestions for managing the economy.

"We have a right to that input. Some of the opposition parties are saying they want to run the government. That's fine. Precisely what is it you want to do?" Harper asked.

Then he turns around and makes amazingly partisan accusations against the opposition parties:

Harper suggested Tuesday that the coalition had little to do with frustrations over his approach to the economy, but was in fact a conspiracy on the part of opposition parties to bring down the recently elected Conservatives.

"I think, frankly, after the election — if not before the election — the opposition parties decided that they would work against the government as an essentially unified front," Harper said.

He went on to accuse NDP Leader Jack Layton and Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe of backing the Liberal party into a corner where it was forced to either vote against the government or be "condemned as sellouts."

I don't know about you, but there's a gaping lack of responsibility here. Harper knows damned good and well that he is responsible for the actions of his party in crafting the FU of two weeks ago. His government not only failed to put forth any sense of clarity of action to address the economic situation, but he - and yes, I believe Harper himself is culpable - placed a couple of resolutions into the mix which none of the opposition parties could or would ever accept.

The other thing that's just plain wrong here is the "tell us what you would do", followed by still more partisan sniping. Let me be excessively explicit about this - you do not get cooperation from people by kicking them in the shins at every opportunity.

What a patently two-faced man.

Hahahaha!

Once in a while, I find myself over at Urban Dictionary to find out what some acronym/phrase/word I've seen used in the quasi-casual language of the internet means.

Today, the 'term of the day' was Academic Bulemia:

The process of learning or memorizing by rote, subsequently followed by the regurgitation of that knowledge onto an exam answer sheet. Just as with the serious eating disorder, this form of bulemia results in no real retention of substance.

This term is frequently applied to describe a common practice of young medical students.

I can't remember anything that I learned last night. It's like I grabbed the answer sheet, puked out all the answers and forgot everything immediately. I'd say that's academic bulemia.

Ouch! But that's funny!

Losing Your Support, Steve?

You might think that when Joseph Ben Ami starts criticizing you Mr. Harper, that you've stepped a few yards over a line.

It's not like the organization Ben Ami runs, the Canadian Centre For Policy Studies, is left leaning (if they started leaning left they might eventually achieve upright...) - in fact Ben Ami is one of McVety's crowd.

But “coup d’état”? “Sedition”? A “subversion of democracy”? Now that Parliament has been prorogued and the crisis averted until at least the end of next month, can we all please, please take a deep breath and relax?

Amazing - a conservative commentator calling out the hyperbole the PMO has been spewing for the last few weeks.

As for “sedition” – well, Mr. Harper’s government was only able to survive for more than 2 ½ years during the previous Parliament because it too had worked out a responsible modus vivendi with the BQ, as any prudent minority government would do. Remember the declaration that Quebec is a nation within Canada? By characterizing the Liberal-NDP willingness to cooperate with the BQ as incitement to treason – which is what sedition is, after all – Mr. Harper and his supporters are not just being insincere; they are engaging in their own brand of incitement. It may serve them well in the short term, but politics has a funny way of exacting revenge on those who practice it with such calculated cynicism. As the Prophet Hosea warned, “Those who sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind.”

Right now, I'd say the word "Conservative" is synonymous with "liar" in this country ... especially where the current government is concerned.

H/T: Queer Thoughts and Canadian Cynic

So...Where's The Media Hiding?

One of the great whines out of the Con$ is about how the evil media is so biased against them. I've heard this whinging coming out of them for years now - especially in Calgary, where even the local newspapers are blatantly conservative-leaning it's not even funny.

But, that said, I'd like to ask the media in general why they aren't calling the Conservatives out on the blatant lies they've been spewing ever since Big Daddy Harper shot his right foot off with his FU gun.

Either you're scared of this Prime Minister, or you've forgotten that not only is your job to report what happened, but it also behooves you to investigate just a little beyond reporting what falls out of a politician's mouth. Whether you remember it or not, the press is a key part of a successful democracy. If you allow politicians to decide for you what you can or cannot write, then you become the propaganda arm of the politicians.

Quite frankly, the blogosphere has done a better job calling the HarperCon$ out on blatant lies and distortion than the paid media lately. For a group that the Con$ keep claiming is biased against them, it's awfully strange that you are giving them a free ride at this time.