Under The Bus

While these Raging Grannies could perhaps use the services of a good singing coach, their hearts, and their lyrics, are clearly in the right place:

We Must Be Luddites

That can be the only possible explanation for the fact that the federal government is breaking its promise to end abuses of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program so that Canadians can have the first opportunity at applying for available jobs.

As reported by the CBC,

The federal government has granted an exemption to Microsoft Canada that will allow the company to bring in an unspecified number of temporary foreign workers to British Columbia as trainees without first looking for Canadians to fill the jobs.

Yep, it is high time we Canadians stopped fearing technology.

Recognizing Harper For What He Is

Last evening I watched a PBS special on the folk trio Peter, Paul and Mary. Archival footage spanning over 50 years of the group and their times reminded me of the passionate and committed century I grew up in, a time that saw people marching en masse to protest the Vietnam War, to advocate for civil rights, etc. Outside of the Occupy Movement, rarely has this century seen such activism.

I often think that the forces of corporatism, aided and abetted by their government enablers, have been very successful in largely muting, if not totally silencing, the spirit of protest. Their relentless message that the market is the only altar to worship at has frequently skewed, perverted and undermined our better natures and the values upon which our society was founded. Care for the collectivity, they suggest, is a quaint notion that has no place in modern life.

Fortunately, not everyone has drunk that particular Kool Aid. There are two major comforts that sustain me in these times; the deep political awareness and critical thinking that my fellow bloggers are so brilliantly capable of, and the regular letters to the editor at The Star that repudiate the passivity so cherished by the right wing.

In today's paper, there is a wealth of missives on the subject of Stephen Harper, all with a common theme: the emperor has no clothes. In his snubbing of Ontario and his refusal to meet our Premier, a myriad of Harper's flaws as both a human being and the leader of the country are exposed for all to see. I hope you check out all of them; here are but a few to whet your appetite:

Re: Deep freeze, Dec. 5

This page one story is a chilling expose. Childish behaviour is an increasing card being played from our political deck. The cry of “we will have another meeting at some point in time” is indicative of a federal leader exhibiting an increasingly punitive, juvenile approach to Ontario citizens. Pretty scary position when one man believes that it is his way or no way.

Hang in there, Premier Wynne. Childish tantrums are often quickly put aside when something shiny attracts their attention. It appears that our prime minister did not learn everything he needed to learn in kindergarten. Pity.

Don Graves, Burlington

It makes you wonder how someone who leads a country as significant as Canada can be so small-minded and treat the largest province in the country with such a contemptuous, childish and partisan attitude. Just because Ontario is led by a Liberal who points out the weaknesses in the Canada Pension Plan and infrastructure payments to Ontario.

I do feel that Kathleen Wynne will soon be in a very enviable position, when Stephen Harper, with cap in hand, will no doubt be forced to appease her and start to make every attempt to persuade Ontario and Quebec to accept the Energy East pipeline. Anyone with any concern of global warming, which Harper obviously has no regard for, would question its credibility and the true benefit to Ontario and Quebec.

Harper will continue to do anything he can to promote Alberta’s oil sales while doing very little to assist the two manufacturing arms of Canada, Ontario and Quebec. I predict Harper will be almost pleading with these two provinces to accept Energy East, even though it appears the ultimate decision will be in the hands of the National Energy Board, which no doubt has been stacked with pro-Harper appointees, similar to the Senate.

Anybody who has taken Economics 101 knows that you should not base your economy purely on commodities; you need to build a manufacuring base too. Commodities go up and down based on supply and demand, while manufacturing creates at least a stable working environment and also makes Canada more competitive in the world.

They say that Ontario and Quebec will decide the next election. The Harper plan for 2015 is to end up with a balanced budget and to give out a few election goodies to entice or fool the public, which he has already started. However I believe with the drop in the oil prices, I doubt he will balance his budget, unless he claws more back from infrastructure payments to the provinces.

My guess is that the 40 per cent who actually voted for Harper in the last election, will start to question the Canada he has created and will realise his expiry date has been exceeded, will realise how little he has done for Ontario and Quebec, and will join the majority 60 per cent who did not vote for him.

John F. Langton, Oakville

Now, let me see if I’ve got this democratic theory right. The Prime Minister represents all of Canada, and not just part of it. He or she works for us and therefore listens to us. He or she is more ear than mouth. And the money that the PM uses to guide us down the path is not his or her money but ours. It is a common wealth.

The PM must take care of all of us, not just the wealthy, the petroleum people, and the corporations. The PM should not empty the cookie jar because, as Aesop showed us centuries ago, we must be ants and not grasshoppers.

And that listening thing goes for all the ministers of the government as well, whether that is Pierre Polievre, Tony Clement, Chris Alexander, Peter MacKay or that tone-deaf and arrogant Veterans Affairs Minister I call Pope Julian.

David J. Paul, London, Ont.

Is Stephen Harper not the prime minister of all 10 provinces of Canada? It appears he is only the prime minister of Alberta, where the oil is, since he won’t meet with our premier. Why then should any Ontarian consider voting for him?

Bev Murray, Burlington

Today's Score: Harper Base 1, True Canadians 0

My previous post reflected on the Faustian nature of Chris Alexander's rise to prominence within the Harper regime. Further evidence of his moral departure from true Canadian values is reflected in this breaking news, which suggests that Canada is preparing to admit Syrian refugees, but only if they fit certain criteria, the biggest one being that they be religious minorities, i.e., Christians, but not Muslims.

Score another one for the Harper base:



Perhaps John Cleese best reflects my sentiments over this disgraceful pending policy:

Chris Alexander's Faustian Pact

By all accounts, before he entered politics, Immigration Minister Chris Alexander was a competent and respected member of Canada's foreign service; his resume includes the fact that he was Canada's first resident Ambassador to Afghanistan. The lustre attending his career, however, has vanished since he become a member of the Harper cabinet, surely a Faustian deal if there ever was one. To dispense with integrity to merely parrot one's master is a choice hard to comprehend.

Earlier in the week, Tim Harper wrote a column on some of the Prime Minister's 'performers' and non-performers. Here is what he said about Alexander:

While his predecessor Jason Kenney could look tough but sell what he said were necessary immigration measures, Alexander usually looks defensive and a little flinty.

He has been accused of fudging the numbers of Syrian refugees who have been accepted by Canada, looked heartless in cutting medical care for refugee claimants, triggered a constitutional challenge with changes to the Citizenship Act and hung up on a CBC host on live radio.

That, in my view, is a rather restrained assessment of the man. In today's Star, letter-writer Pam Churchill of Toronto offers what is perhaps a more penetrating evaluation:

Re: Some weak players in PM’s dream-team cabinet, Dec. 8

Columnist Tim Harper speaks for many of us when he ponders the mystery of Chris Alexander, “a young, smart, former ambassador with world experience who should be a natural, but is still finding his way in a complicated portfolio.”

Maureen Dowd offers some insight (New York Times, May 19, 2014). When I think of Chris Alexander, her words come to mind.

She was speaking of Condoleeza Rice, “who had all the qualities to dazzle. Smart, attractive, hardworking, personable, chic . . . she sailed to success at an early age.” Yet, says Dowd, “she exceeded at failing better” because “her real ideology was succeeding.” So, says Dowd, “in order to succeed, she rejected old mentors, Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell, and went along with the preposterous pre-emption plan of the old hawks who had far less respect for her: Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld” and “made a Faustian deal to sell a fake war.”

To Dowd, it is a lesson in selling your soul, which should teach us about “the perils of succeeding at any cost, about how moral shortcuts never lead to the right place.”

Perhaps Chris Alexander does not believe what he says nor support the policies he espouses. That could explain why he is still finding his way. Whatever the answer, thinking about him always brings Dowd to mind and leaves me sad.

To be sure, both Rice and Alexander are sobering object lessons of the heavy price many are willing to pay to be key participants in today's political arena.

Where Some Truth Resides

A friend of mine sent me the following. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did:

Prime Minister Harper took an aerial tour of the proposed pipeline route through BC earlier this week.

When he returned he said he thought it went reasonably well.

Remembering A 'Superstar'

Well, we arrived back in the early hours of yesterday, having enjoyed a relaxing week in Cuba. Unfortunately, there was no English-speaking Canadian television available, so I feel unprepared to offer any political commentary until I get caught up. Fortuitously, however, my son sent me the following item, which, I hope, you will find of interest.

Is it wrong for me to feel such deep and utter disdain for Jonathan Bernier, who, as you will see in the video below, does nothing to dispel the stereotype of the 'dumb jock.'