Looking Back

Although it was made in 2013, the following 22 Minutes' video has lost none of its relevance:

Fun With Stephen

As a Facebook wag described the above, Harper's caucus room post-election.





I have always respected Smokey's advice. At this critical juncture, Canadians would be foolish to ignore him.

Harper Under Seige

Once more, editorial cartoonist Graeme MacKay scores a solid bullseye.



As does Corrigan over at The Star:



And let's not forget Star readers:

Since the post-2008 Great Recession, Stephen Harper’s primary focus on energy (oil/gas) economic action strategies have painted our economic flexibilities into a corner. Now we find our transnational economic drivers near exhausted.

Interest rates are now .05 per cent. We are on the precipice of falling financially/economically into quicksand recessionary territory.

In hindsight, consider what if we had developed multi-faceted strategies for dynamic, clean-energy manufacturing 21st century technologies in critical mass in construction, science, industry and commerce? Would we be so constrained now with lowest possible oil/gas commodity prices? Would our “loonie” be so vulnerable? Would our frivolousness with tax dollars tied to ineffective foreign policies be so committed to 20th century industrial, free market strategic imbecilities?

Harper’s single-minded chess tactics with much of what he mismanages is fast becoming an economically unmanoeuvreable position now on a precarious global stage. And now with Iran’s economic sanctions lifting as result of the deal with the Western powers, there’s no promise of recovery ever being tied to those “triple-digit” commodity prices that Canada’s oil producers followed our PM so recklessly on.

Brian McLaughlin, Saint John, NB

I’ll have to agree with Mr. Goodale’s take on Harper’s economic record. What’s Mr. Harper’s experience in economics, again? None in the private sector that I could find. I think Canadians know who is really in over their head.

Geoffrey Allen, Markham

And one more reminder from MacKay of Mr. Harper's fiscal ineptitude:

The Harper Regime In One Easy-To-Understand Graphic!

H/t Boycott The Harper Conservatives

For those of you who are more text-oriented or want a comprehensive recounting of the depredations of the Harper years, I encourage you to check out and bookmark Rural's Harper History Series over at Democracy Under Fire.

Rural has taken on the unenviable and herculean but noble task of compiling the myriad abuses of and acts of contempt against democracy during King Stephen's reign; it is a lot to take in and can be depressing at times to see what we have lost, but if read in measured amounts is a very useful reminder of why it is paramount that we toss out this band of renegades in October.

I encourage you to visit his series regularly as we head into the election, and share with those who you think might benefit.

Harperland As Seen By Editorial Cartoonists

H/t ipolitics

Speaking Of Conservative Crime

It seems that our Prime Minister may have violated his own anti-terror law against terrorist imagery and propaganda.

As reported by CTV,

A new Conservative attack ad takes aim at Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau’s position on the mission against the Islamic State, but it uses the terrorist group’s own horrifying propaganda images.

In the online ad, posted on the Conservative Party’s Facebook page, Trudeau is shown in a CBC interview saying he would end the CF-18 bombing campaign against the terrorist group, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

The ad uses Islamic State propaganda, including gruesome images of prisoners facing death by drowning and beheading -- and those images may actually violate the government’s own anti-terror law.

Given its pattern of skirting and breaking laws, this may be of no great concern to the Harper regime. But perhaps this will give the apparatchik pause:

Advertising executive Tony Chapman wondered how the uses of ISIS imagery would help the Conservatives score political points.

“Not only are they providing free advertising for ISIS, they’re completely offside and driving Canadian politics to a new low,” said Tony Chapman.

While the exploitation of fear is nothing new to the Conservatives, perhaps this latest example will provoke the backlash it so roundly deserves:

On the same day that ISIS releases yet another barbaric video, Justin Trudeau promises to stop bombing ISIS. He’s clearly just not ready for the serious job of Prime Minister.

Posted by Conservative Party of Canada - Parti conservateur du Canada on Thursday, June 25, 2015

The Latest In Fashion

I dunno, there is just something about this shirt....

The Salamander Has Some Questions

The Salamander has been doing a lot of thinking, and has some questions. Read his post, and feel free to weigh in:

.. the other day, I was thinking about 'the Base' ..
that unusual group of committed voters for Stephen Harper..
plus truly fervent media.. Lilley, Levant et al
wondering what caused their odd shrill partisan malady

And I was also thing about the Harper apparatus - Party & Government
and the retinue of PMO, lawyers, RoboCall vendors, pollsters etc etc
and beyond belief wealthy corporate partners & think tanks
you know, the folks that truly benefit from their complicity

And then I thought about the rest of Canada.. voters, people, kids, elders etc
and within that group I guess falls Trudeau & Mulcair, May et al
all with some sort of perspective or belief in what exactly Canada stands for
province to province, urban rural, young old, employed or unemployed etc

I can't claim any blinding insight came from that particular thinking session
it was really just musing to myself on how laughable or insane the reality is..

I asked myself some simple questions though.. about what defines Canadians
now.. like right now.. A majority of Canadians.. and to a certain extent..
eligible voter Canadians.. When they vote.. what drives that decision?
Or even if not voting, what drives their perception of Canada
and their perception of the politics or politicians currently serving Canadians..
You know.. as elected public servants.. or paid public servants ?

I plan to write a 'rant' .. like the 'I am Joe' kind of rant..
and I want to write it correctly.. because I'm not Joe.. I'm me
and I want the rant to speak to and speak for current Canadians

And if I can't exactly put my thumb on what describes all Canadians
or what the particular dreams, needs or wishes of each or all Canadians are ..
I certainly want to identify what I'm certain they do not want or believe in..
as well as the issues or action or realities that give them pause, fear & doubts

I get that Canadians may not support Trudeau, Mulcair, Ms May etc
as being a clear improvement over Mr Harper & his record or promises
and that bothers me.. It really truly scares me, as a Canadian..
That we have no obvious and clear alternative to a despicable flailing government

How can this be? That we must even contemplate such a catastrophic failure?

I'll think on this some more.. work on my rant..
and hope Duffy & Harper's key associates' testimonies
at the very least send the toxic government, party and apparatus packing

And Speaking Of Profound Stupidity

...not to mention rabid partisanship, watch another Harper MP disgrace herself:



I wonder how well any of this sits with Cheryl Gallant's riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. Don't those constituents, like the ones living in James Lunney's riding, deserve better?

A Voice From The Past

The always mellifluous Brian Mulroney offers some less than sweet-sounding words for the Harper government. As reported in The Globe and Mail, in an interview with Don Martin on CTV's Power Play, the former prime minister is quite critical of aspects of of the current, and warns that the electoral appetite for change is real and needs to be respected.

About Harper's very public and disgraceful dispute with Canada's Chief Justice, he says:

“You don’t get into a slagging contest with the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, even if you thought that he or she was wrong ... You don’t do that.”

On Canada's current relationship with the United Natons:

“When Canada, for the first time in our history, loses a vote at the United Nations to become a member of the Security Council . . . to Portugal, which was on the verge of bankruptcy at the time, you should look in the mirror and say: ‘Houston, I think we have a problem.’”

Without explicitly criticizing the Harper record on the environment, Mulroney says that

a “pristine environment” is important to Canada’s middle class.

“There are very few things that the middle class value more than the environment . . . and that’s one thing we can deliver on,” he said.

“The prime minister alone has to make it a very strong priority of the government, has to make sure it has the funds and the clout.”

About Justin Trudeau:

“His program is that he’s not Stephen Harper ... When I ran in ‘84... I won because I wasn’t Pierre Trudeau and then Jean Chrétien 10 years later won because he wasn’t Brian Mulroney. So it’s part of a desire for change, which is normal, and so I think it’s going to make for a great election [in 2015].”

Like a priest inspecting the entrails of a sacrificed animal, Mulroney's words suggest impending darkness for the Harper crew. And like many imperial presences of the past, Emperor Harper is likely to ignore these auguries at his peril and our gain.

This Has Gotta Hurt

Expect the Harper attack machine to ramp up its game:

This Just In

I've got a bit of a busy morning ahead, so just a brief post for now.

In a study reported in this morning's Star, geneticist Dr. Gerald Crabtree offers his view

... that human intelligence peaked at the time of hunter-gatherers and has since declined as a result of “genetic mutations” that have slowly eroded the human brain’s intellectual and emotional abilities.

Judging by who the electorate has been putting at the helm in Ottawa since 2006, I find the good doctor's thesis difficult to dispute.

A Glimmer of Hope?

Perhaps the Canadian electorate is salvageable, after all.

One of Nature's Hidden Affronts

I assume this requires no commentary from me:

H/t janfromthebruce

When It Comes To Our Veterans

... the Canadian government knows that talk is cheap.

What is Truth?

An age-old question without a firm answer, it is one I find myself regularly pondering as I continue striving toward an ideal I know I'll never attain, that of being a consummate critical thinker. Bombarded by information as we are, it is often difficult to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff and arrive at satisfactory conclusions. And of course, there is always one's own biases to contend with as major filters of that information.

Take, for example, my deep antipathy toward the Harper Conservatives. So used to their tactics of denigration, disparagement, denial and deception am I that part of me strongly believes truth in any form is alien to them, that their actions are driven not by any concern for us as a nation, but only as the subjects of a grand neo-conservative experiment.

But to interpret everything they do according to that restrictive framework is also to deny true critical thinking and is simply to be as reactionary as the right-wing.

And so, in the spirit of honest inquiry, I seek to make an honest assessment of the changes to Employment Insurance announced yesterday by Human Resources Minister Diane Finley. Is it, as Star columnist Tim Harper suggests, a reform that curiously dovetails "with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation view that a bunch of lazy layabouts are milking the system and forcing more ambitious offshore workers to do the work they won’t do" ?

Or is it "all about matching Canadians hungry for work with employers hungry for employing Canadians instead of foreign workers," as the government insists?

Another question: what commitment does Ottawa have to improving and expanding access to retraining programs for those seeking to upgrade their skills? And how do the E.I. changes affect them?

Like all policy conducted in secrecy instead of collaboratively with the public, this legislation invites the worst of interpretations, whether or not those interpretations are wholly warranted. Such is the price to be a paid by a regime committed to restricting the flow of information and treating those it 'serves' with palpable contempt.

That kind of philosophy of government certainly doesn't make it easier to be a critical thinker these days.

CBC Truculence: Too Little, Too Late

About a year ago, I lamented the fact that the CBC, through Peter Mansbridge, seemed to be following a policy of appeasement toward the Harper government, probably in the forlorn hope of avoiding further decimation of its funding. Quite predictably, as we learned last week, that policy has proven to be an abject failure.

It is perhaps that realization that produced some 'fire in the belly' of last night's At Issues panel, which saw pretty much a uniform condemnation of the Harper regime over its gross and intentional misrepresentation of the true cost of the F-35 jet procurement program. The issue of ministerial responsibility got a pretty good airing on the panel.

I do, however, continue to be troubled by the presence of Bruce Anderson on the panel. Anderson, a senior 'spin' advisor, er, I mean public relations consultant, is described in his profile as 'one of Canada’s most experienced advisors specializing in issue, marketing and reputation management'. And it is through that lens that he evaluates the Harper regime misdeeds; as I noted in an earlier post when, on Tuesday's special panel, he wondered whether the issue will resonate with the public. He sang much the same tune last night, and while I truly hope that issues of public morality and basic democratic expectations cannot be reduced simply to public opinion, part of me fears that in this age of superficiality and a disengaged electorate, there might be some truth in his observation.

In any event, I hope if, on this Good Friday, you have about 15 minutes to spare, you will view last night's edition. As well, if you have an additional 3 minutes and 40 seconds to spare, I highly recommend for your delectation Rex Murphy's withering assessment both of Harper and Defense Minister Peter MacKay, describing the latter as an 'honourary cabinet minister' and an 'ornament.'

It is sad, however, that the CBC was unable to find its fortitude and integrity earlier, when it might have made a difference. I'm afraid that now, all of this 'sound and fury' does indeed signify 'nothing.'

A Very Conservative Christmas Message

Couldn't resist this one. Thanks to Mark-Leiren-Young.

Merry Christmas, Diane Finley

Actually, the title of this post was just to get your attention. I would indeed be an unfeeling man were I to wish the minister of Human Resources and Skills Development the best of the season when so many Canadians are suffering as a result of her inept attempt to streamline and make more efficient the distribution of Employment Insurance benefits by closing 98 employment insurance processing centres and firing 1,200 Service Canada workers.

With record wait-times to receive benefits, many unemployed are missing bank and mortgage payments, overdrawing their accounts, etc., all of which puts to the lie Finley's claim that all is well and working better than ever. Her employment with Harper, Inc. (as one astute reader referred to the government in today's print edition of The Star) as the good functionary carrying out her overlord's directives with nary a whimper of protest or twang of conscience renders her, as it does all of Harper's underlings, unfit for continued employment by the people of Canada.

Click here to read of one man's experiences thanks to Finley's 'improvements.'

There's No Business Like Snow Business

When I was young, there used to be a polite term for B.S. We called it a snow job, and that seems as apt a description as any of the latest Harper government capitulation to the cancerous tentacles of unfettered capitalism running virtually unchecked throughout this country thanks to our 'leader's' diseased love of all things corporate.

As I wrote last evening, despite the fact that U.S. Steel lost its appeal against the federal government, it is essentially getting a free pass for its Hamilton operation by promising to keep the plant going until 2015 and promising capital investments of $50 million by the end of that time. Of course, for those able to think critically and not simply trust to the magnanimity of a company that already betrayed its employment promises and locked out its workers for almost a year after it was given permission to buy the former Stelco, these promises mean nothing.

The failure of the Harper government to show any integrity in attempting to put the force of law behind foreign takeover promises does mean something, however, to those affected by this sell-out.

Consider the following:

Opposition politicians and workers: outraged by a deal they say contains no specifics on employment or production in Canada and offers nothing to workers harmed by the company’s failure to keep its original promises.

Leaders of the United Steel Workers: “blindsided” by the deal, even though they have intervener status in the action to seek back wages its members would have earned under the company’s original promise to employ an average of 3,105 workers for three years after purchasing Stelco.

“We didn’t know any of this was going to happen and yet we’re the ones affected by their failure to live up to their promises,” said Rolf Gerstenberger, president of Local 1005, which represents workers in Hamilton. “Where’s our redress now? Our members were unjustly laid off and they should be made whole.”

Bill Ferguson, president of Nanticoke’s Local 8782: “incomprehensible” for the government to drop the case without ensuring workers got some kind of compensation.

“We are shocked that our government has cut this secret deal, without even the decency of consulting those who are most affected,” he added. “Our communities and our working families — particularly those whose jobs have disappeared — have been abandoned by U.S. Steel, and now our own government.”

Ken Neumann, Canadian director of USW: “This is a complete abdication of the government’s responsibility to Canadian workers,” he said. “It’s just outrageous that we have no commitment to jobs now.”

Local MPs Wayne Marston and Chris Charlton, both of the NDP, said they were troubled by utter lack of detail in the settlement announcement.

“The government is dropping this lawsuit in exchange for more promises after taking the company to court for not keeping its promises in the first place,” Charlton said. “For all we know this just allows the company to fatten the calf for three years and then sell it.”

Of course, the Harper government's local cheerleader, M.P. David Sweet, a practising Christian blithely untroubled by anything his government does, even its export of death, I mean asbestos, to third-world countries, described the capitulation “as an “extraordinary” achievement that ensures steel production in Hamilton through the next three years.

“By agreeing to this (U.S. Steel) has indicated that they are here for the long term,” he said. “Agreeing to invest that kind of money sends a very positive signal that they are here for the long term.”

And of course, with the current band of renegades holding the reins of power federally, the voices and opinions of Mr. Sweet and his ilk are the only ones that matter here, aren't they?