Friday night ode to stevie, petey, julian, and rona: lies & liars

oh, hell - the whole damn party for backing the BS.  Here's for the lot of you lying scumbags as you settle in this Good Friday to remember how your god gave his only begotten son to save you from your sins - sins such as lying to the great detriment of those you are sworn to serve.  You may be off the hook in your mythical afterlife, but here, reality rules.

Big thanks to Den Tandt for using the “L” word.  And drawing back stevie’s fig leaf for all to see what kind of a man he really is.  For those who didn’t know what’s been obvious to many of us for years.

UK politics, but very appropriate to current Canadian politics

They're all missing critical parts.

The CONs are vile.  No brains, no heart.

Near the end of question period Thursday in the House of Commons, a Conservative backbencher stood up to talk about the final passage of Bill C-19, the bill that would end the long-gun registry, and channelled civil rights leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Martin Luther King Jr.

John Williamson, in a ridiculous display of really bad, over-the-top showmanship cried out  “Free at last, free at last, law-abiding Canadians are finally free at last” in praise of the death of the long gun registry.  He stole the gist of the line from Martin Luther King Jr's famous I have a dream speech.  Williamson delivered this obscenity one day after the anniversary of King's murder - by a fucking sniper.

There is seriously something very dysfunctional with people like that who cannot see how their words and actions violate the very principles behind the words they steal.

And the story of CON stupidity and vileness continues - 

The federal government is backing down from proposed strict new ammunition regulations after receiving complaints from gun owners...The draft regulations, made public in March, included proposals that had ammunition being locked up and added severe new restrictions on the quantity of ammunition someone could own and store.

Terrific.  Now those law-abidin', hard wurkin' canadiuns can leave as much ammo as they want kicking around the house where little Johnny and little Mary (raised in a home where guns are promoted) have free access.  And criminals looking for a weapon can now not only break into just about any home in CONstituencies and avail themselves of an unregistered weapon, they can get their ammo there as well, load on the spot, and shoot the law abidin', hard workin' canadiun if he or a family member comes home suddenly.   Then the thief, well armed, can go on and raid more homes and stockpile more unregistered weapons.  But that's ok, because some yahoo with immediate access to ammo can blow his fucking head off and become a hero.

Gotta give in to those complaints by gun owners.  After all, little Johnny and little Mary can't vote.  And they aren't fetuses.

The ever oblivious Vic seems to have neglected to read yet another piece of proposed legislation he is responsible for - and of course, blames bureaucrats:

 

"Those regulations were brought to my attention a day or two ago," said Public Safety Minister Vic Toews on Thursday. "That was a discussion I think was mainly inside the bureaucracy, and I just reiterate that is not regulations that will proceed as proposed."

I know Vic is quite busy trying to track down dangerous terrorists who publish public information, but he really should read the shit he's trying to pass.  It's looking like the CONs make Bills and Acts up as they go along based on pressure from their rabid base and big money stakeholders.

Which is, of course, exactly what they do.

Stupidity causes global warming

The Harper government's decision to kill its own environmental advisory board could result in a government hearing little else but its own voice on climate change, says a former director of Environment Canada's meterological and climate research branch.

That’d be the voice of people like Peter Worthington.

Worthington, that old, white, failed conservative candidate must have simply decided when he graduated from Carleton U.  in the fifties that there simply was nothing more to learn.  Any new research, any recent world events, any post-50s facts are just...fads.  Or the lies of communists.
How else can one explain his response to Elizabeth May objecting to the fact that the 2012 federal budget doesn’t even mention climate change:
(emphasis mine)

One might ask why on earth the budget would mention climate change? There is nothing you, I, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair, or even Elizabeth May herself can do about climate change.  Climate change is going to happen, we just don’t know to what extent.

And why is it such a threat to our future? We will adapt to it, whatever it is, and even if no one fully understands it, we still have to live with it. Climate is always changing.  Thank goodness we no longer stress “global warming,” and now call it “climate change.” (WTF?)

If Canada were to abandon the Keystone pipeline, ceased trying to extract oil from the earth, eliminated oil tankers, forbade SUVs, outlawed cigarettes and allowed only whole wheat bread, it wouldn’t stop the climate from changing if the climate continued to want to change.

Peter...where to start...

The climate doesn’t want to change.  It doesn’t not want to change.  It simply changes as a result of forces around it, and one of those forces is the impact of human beings spewing crap into a closed system – the Earth system.

“Climate change is going to happen, we just don’t know to what extent... We will adapt to it, whatever it is...”  Well, no.  That’s the fallacy of the ignorant who mock science yet blindly believe “they” – those scientists – will come up with a solution.  If we keep warming the planet at the rate we are, there will come a point at which the devastations caused by the warming will occur so rapidly and with such frequency and ferocity that we will not have the time or resources to “adapt” our entire species to the new and unstable environment.

Worthington goes on to say that because the climate is changing anyway (because it wants to), that we should focus on what’s really important -  “tap the continent’s oil reserves...exploit our resources. Period.”

If a fire is threatening to spread, a few people trying to control it will have no success if others are avidly feeding it as fast as they can.  The fire will reach a point where it will destroy even those feeding it.  It doesn’t want to.  It can’t help it though, because that’s the science at work.

“Thank goodness we no longer stress “global warming,” and now call it “climate change.”” First, WTF gives him relief in that?  Next - Worthington is a journalist?  He doesn’t know that those terms mean two different things?

"Without the national round table, they can go wherever they like for advice, and sometimes that may mean they go after the people who are going to give them the answer they expect to get," said John Stone, a former Environment Canada employee who has worked with the agency.  "I can imagine very easily that the vacuum will be filled with organizations and interests which are more inclined to deny climate change, sow doubt about climate change and hence, hold back progress," said Mr. Stone, who is currently an adjunct professor with Carleton University's geography and environmental studies department.

“Hold back progress...”  There’s the problem.  To the harpers and worthingtons of this world, progress is only linked to economic development, and protecting our planet and life on it just doesn’t turn a quick enough buck.  What they fail to realize in their monumental ignorance, what even a young child can understand is that you can’t make money if you use up the means to make it, and you sure as hell can’t spend it if you’re dead.

The not very lean but very mean budget

Far and Wide calls it the Vendetta Budget.  Yes, it is that, with cuts to Elections Canada, wiping out the Katimavik program, butchering the CBC, and now we hear starving the Information Commissioner who "is currently in the midst of a comprehensive review of alleged interference with access to information requests by political staffers, a self-initiated inquiry that followed her investigation into similar allegations against Sebastien Tognieri, a former aide to then-Industry Minister Christian Paradis, but soon mushroomed to include other departments, including Foreign Affairs and PCO. "

It is also a mean budget.

Jim Flaherty axed the National Council of Welfare in Thursday’s budget.  The independent, federally-appointed body was created by an act of Parliament in 1969 to advise the minster of human resources on poverty in Canada.  But since the Harper government was elected in 2006, it has ignored the council’s research and advice on how to address growing income disparity across the country, activists say.

“Many non-governmental organizations . . . provide quality independent advice and research on poverty-related issues,” said Alyson Queen (spokesperson for Human Resources Minister Diane Finley).

Sure, but they don't report regularly to a federal department and they don't work for the public.  The CONs blend their meanness and vendetta tactics in cancelling The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy and claiming that "it can now get this advice from the Internet and stakeholders."

Right. Advice from the Internet.


In both cases, harper saves himself the trouble of hiding embarrassing - but accurate reports that clearly point out his policies are dangerous and costly.  He then gets to pick whatever "advice" suits him and present it as credible.  Hell, he can even make up his own advice.

No wonder he wants to silence all independent agencies that produce impartial reports for the public.

“So, I guess we don’t want to know anything about poverty or how to solve it,” said NDP MP Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina).  “Without the information, no one will be able to report on how many people this Conservative government is leaving behind,” she added. “It’s called out of sight and out of mind. And don’t get in the way.”

But pay your taxes.  Oh yes.  That they will track.  And your online activities.  And whether or not you are one of those dangerous Canadians that forced the harpercons to create the Building Resilience Against Terrorism strategy which seeks to protect law abidin' hard workin' Canadiuns from “low-level violence by domestic-based groups remains a reality in Canada… revolving around the promotion of various causes such as animal rights, white supremacy, environmentalism, and anti-capitalism.”

And all this, for the 1%

Congrats, Justin.

According to Kady O', it was a solid win as well with Trudeau keeping Brazeau against the ropes a fair bit, and Brazeau looking pretty exhausted.

Nice.

I always felt what Den Tandt wrote today, that Trudeau comes out a winner regardless of the outcome of the match.  It was his idea, his invite, and he has been gracious and light hearted from the start, while brazeau was doing a great deal of bragging, sure he'd win, and boasted about how he planned to knock Trudeau out.

It'll be nice not having every other CON MP in the House engaging in boasts over the match as well.

Brazeau is a shameless apple, a disgrace as a senator, a self-centered, egotistical slimeoid, and a loud-mouthed braggart, so this looks good on him.

I am looking forward to seeing his "haircut of shame."

Back to more serious blogging tomorrow, hopefully!

Not just a Crime Minister, but a dumb Crime Minister

If you’re going to set someone up to take the fall for your crime, you should choose a source not obviously connected to you to present the fabrication. (emphasis mine)

Mr. Sona has told former co-workers he learned from the Sun News Network that he was being fingered by Conservative sources in connection with the phony calls. Friends say the ex-aide was sitting in his office in late February when Sun News broke a story that Tories had tied him to “a robo-calling scandal.”   The Sun News Network was the first media outlet to link Mr. Sona to the controversy. 

Anonymous Conservatives have repeatedly fingered Michael Sona, singling out him alone among a group of workers on the campaign of Guelph candidate Matty Burke, but a source says Sona had no reason to believe Elections Canada was interested in him until he was named by unidentified senior Tories in a report on Sun News Network the day the story broke.

 ...Sona wasn’t even a person of interest to Elections Canada until he was cited in media reports, according to the source. Al Mathews, the former RCMP inspector leading the probe, did not speak to Sona until after the 23-year-old left Adams’ office.

...As recently as Monday night, Conservative sources were pushing Sona in connection to the Guelph robocalls. A CTV News report cited unnamed Conservatives saying Sona had owned up to the calls amid reports that the investigation had traced an Internet Protocol address used by “Poutine” to a home in Guelph, Ontario.

You should make your scapegoat someone who has the abilities needed to commit your crime.

A source close the investigation said Tuesday that it seems unlikely that a 23-year-old, acting alone, would have been able to pull off the fairly complicated “Pierre Poutine” caper, recording a bilingual, legitimate-sounding message purportedly from Elections Canada, setting up a screen of two false identities using a prepaid cellphone and credit card, and expertly covering his electronic tracks.

And you should make sure that the poor schmuck you are setting up had opportunity to commit your vile crime -

The Conservatives keep track of supporters and other voters through a massive database called the constituency information management system (CIMS), which was created and expanded under Stephen Harper’s leadership of the party. Access to CIMS is controlled through personal accounts with passwords. One person familiar with the local Guelph campaign estimated that perhaps 10 to 15 people working there had personal CIMS accounts. “Everything is logged,” a Conservative source said. 

Someone familiar with the investigation said that CIMS records indicate Michael Sona, then-communications director to candidate Marty Burke, never used his CIMS account to draw down lists of voters during the campaign. 

Scum Sun Media and CTV News should be forced to reveal the names of the “unidentified senior Tories” who pointed their fingers at Sona.  

Toews cries and threatens a guy who legally tweeted truths about Mr. Family Values and is forcing him to go before a committee.  “Senior Tories” make up lies about a guy that put his life in a downward spiral, Sun Media pushes the lies, and they get paid.

Better go to confession, Julian

Seeing as to how Fantino is failing in his holy anddecent mission to equip the armed forces…

In  November 2011, I wrote "watch for the cancellation or shelving of the F-35 as harper now blames the Liberals" for opening the competition."

Wow.  The gung-ho war on  everything take no prisoners use support the troops party of steve is in “retreat?”  It is “publicly backtracking?”  

Thomas Walkom says in his article that this flimsy acknowledgement by Fantino that the crusade for the F-35 may not take the field is harper admitting he was wrong.  I think not.  The Crime Minister will never admit he was wrong.  Never.  He will continue to blame the Liberals.  That’s a no-brainer.

Still, it makes me enjoy a wicked thought.  The Liberals, NDP, and Bloc could just toss back steve’s vile speaking points at the CONs rather than write their own, but they won’t, and in reality I am glad for that. 

But let us indulge in a bit of fiendish fun:

“Our experts have put out their detailed figures and everything we've seen is within those figures and their contingencies — the contingencies that have been allowed," Harper said. (April 26, 2011)

"A lot of the developmental costs you're reading in the United States, the contract we've signed shelters us from any increase in those kinds of costs. We're very confident of our cost estimates and we have built in some latitude, some contingency in any case. So we are very confident we are within those measures." (harper, April 8, 2011)

My favorite:

“We will purchase the F-35,” Fantino asserted. “We’re on record. We’re part of the crusade. We’re not backing down.” (November 2011)

And (note the date!)–

"Canada has set a budget for replacement aircraft and we have been clear that we will operate within that budget," Fantino said in a statement. (March 2, 2012)

Baird must now acknowledge that the harper party doesn’t support the troops -

 “…there is nodenying that the new jet fighters that our air force so desperately needs to replace the CF-18s, which will be 40 years old, will have a price…“Let me say this,” Mr. Baird went on, warming up now. “The men and women in the Canadian armed forces are prepared to pay the ultimate price. They are prepared to sacrifice. They are brave. What do they count on? They count on the government to provide them with the tools they need. If that means it is going to be $50 a year or $1 a week to provide for Canadian sovereignty and to give our men and women the tools they need to do the job, it is a price that we are prepared to pay.” (March 10, 2011)

Not so much today, eh, Baird?

We musn’t leave out Airshow:

“We have been clear that we will operate within that budget,” (MacKay) said in a speech to the Conference of Defence Associations annual meeting. “And we will give our air men and women the best available aircraft, which I believe is the fifth-generation, F-35 Lightning II.” (February 4, 2012)

Right, Pete.  Run and get DND to dig up some way to further blame the Liberals for your failure to give the beloved troops “the best available aircraft.”

And a few photos for our pleasure - 

Fetuses as human beings, the long gun registry, and Dear Leader

In April, MP Woodworth will ask  “Parliament to create a committee of politicians whose task it will be to review a law that stops short of defining unborn children as "human beings."  A committee of MPs has agreed to give Woodworth at least one hour of debate sometime in April. He will receive a second hour of debate sometime either in late spring or early fall.”

Why would harper allow this? A few reasons:

1.  Two of the biggest fund raisers for the CONs have been killing off the big, bad long gun registry and the equally vile and dangerous CBC.  With the registry gone and massive cuts in the works for CBC, the CON base has to be re-injected with CON-rabies or some virus that similarly keeps them mindlessly frothing at the mouth.  It also needs to make people want to donate money.  Promises of removing women’s right to control their own reproductive choices and their own bodies will do both.

 

2.  Stop the erosion of their base: Bill C-30 angered even some hard core CONs.  Many are very involved in social media and understand how that spy Bill would endanger their online freedom.  OAS reforms suggested by the CONs hits one of the right’s core group of supporters – older Canadians.  Show them another shiny object, the kind they easily get worked up over, and send signals that the CONs really do intend to regulate women’s wombs.

3.  Any big topic (and abortion debate always draws big crowds) is welcomed by harper right now because it takes away from discourse surrounding the very serious allegations of criminal activities committed by his party during the last (and possibly earlier) elections.

Before anyone thinks I’m being extreme in what I write below, I am not getting into the “what ifs” such as contraceptives except as they could be affected directly by such a re-definition of a human being.

If a fetus is defined as a human being, then it is entitled to the same rights.  That means if a fetus dies, there will have to be an investigation to determine cause of death.  

Let’s look at what defining a fetus as a human being means:

1.   Anyone deliberately causing the termination of the fetus would be guilty of murder including those who aided or enabled the termination.  Anyone trying to cover it up after the fact could also be charged.  

Many anti-choicers think this is a good idea, but read on – 

2.  Anyone causing the termination of a pregnancy could be charged with a range of crimes from neglect leading to death or manslaughter.  

Now listen up, you anti-choicers.  Even you men:

If a pregnant woman miscarries, the termination would have to be treated as the death of a human being and as such would have to be investigated.  A cause of death would have to be determined.  Many people are saying this will set women up for charges of manslaughter if they didn’t maintain perfect health and care throughout the pregnancy.  Yes, we already see that happening in the States.  Did the woman drink alcohol or take in any possibly harmful substances?  Did she eat a healthy diet, get enough rest, enough exercise? Did she take measures to reduce stress, to control her weight in a healthy way?  Did she do everything she possibly could to avoid harm to the fetus?  Ignorance is no excuse because it is her responsibility to protect the fetus just as it is her responsibility to protect a child.

But not every unintentional death is the result of the woman's behaviour.  Did hubby provide healthy food throughout the pregnancy?  Did he intercede if he suspected or knew the woman was doing something that could risk the pregnancy?  Did he do everything he could to reduce stress for her?  Did he make sure she got enough sleep?  Did he take on a significant amount of household chores to ease her physical burden?  Did he take over tasks that involved the use of chemical cleaners?  Did he babysit the other kids and teach them not to jump on mommy’s belly?  Was he extra careful during sex?

And you bosses – did you accommodate her properly during the pregnancy?  Did you make sure she wasn’t handling chemicals, changing toner on machines, exposed to machines or equipment that could harm the pregnancy?  Did you make sure not to let her give into typical job pressures of long hours?

And you doctors – better make sure your insurance covers the many, many things you could be sued for in wrongful death.

Now the really tricky stuff that still would absolutely have to be covered if a fetus is a human being:

1.  How can the legal system which must now protect all  fetuses know if a woman is pregnant?  Are we to trust women to report every pregnancy?  Not likely, since we already know that many believe abortion is not murder and history has shown us some get so desperate that they will obtain one illegally.  But the law has to protect all fetuses just as it has to protect all human beings, so the only sure answer is to have women go to registered clinics for a pregnancy test every month for as long as they have even one viable egg left in their government regulated ovaries.

If this isn’t done, a woman could sneak off and have an abortion.

Even REAL women, virtuous ones who would never ever deliberately end a pregnancy could accidentally kill a fetus if they don’t know they are pregnant and where’s the justice for Little Fetus?  What if the woman doesn’t know she is pregnant and decides to go on birth control, or ties one on, or goes bungie-jumping?  What if her hubby pours her an extra glass of champagne on their anniversary?

2.  Folks can’t use the argument that they didn’t know the woman was pregnant because if a fetus is a human being, it is entitled to the same rights as a human being, and people should know that it’s possible that there could be a little fetus growing away.  The only way to be sure there’s no little potential homicide victim hiding in a womb is when the woman starts her period and for a short time after that, so except for that week or so, every woman with even a single viable egg left would have to act – and be treated as – a pregnant woman just in case.  The only time she can be somewhat neglected and neglectful is when she’s on the rag – which is just fine because who wants anything to do with a menstruating  woman anyway?  But she can’t drop all of her responsibilities to the potential fetuses and their potential rights since drugs (and that includes the ones to curb the menstrual pains) stay in her system for some time, or can cause damage.  

Some people will say this is all ridiculous and that the first point – deliberately terminating a pregnancy is the only one that could come about (because it’s really the only one supporters of such a fetus rights  Bill really want), but that would not reflect what the Bill legally defines: Fetus= Human Being.  Everything a person can now be held responsible for a fetus when it comes to caring for, or harming (intentionally or otherwise), or killing, or neglecting just as they now are for a human being.  

3.  Look at all the points above and realize that this applies not only to the death of a fetus, but to its development as well.  If a child is born with a disability or illness, the mother and anyone who had any impact on the fetus would be legally responsible for any permanent or long term ill effects the fetus suffered.

Stephen Woodworth’s bull-shit argument:

The review, he argues, is needed because the law is based on a 400-year-old definition of human being.  "If a child five minutes before birth can be defined as not a human being, then the question is who's next?" he argued.

What a load of crap.  What a dishonest argument.  Four hundred years ago, some races weren’t considered human beings in some lands.  Neither were women.  Their rights were moved forward at great cost to many.  To imply that anyone now considered a human being could be reclassified as something less because in Canada, our government hasn’t declared a fetus as a human being is...insane.  But I do consider the source.  Especially since it comes from the same group of people who largely want to bring back the death penalty.  And who think it’s ok to fire warning shots over people’s heads.  And who believe everyone should have the right to carry concealed, unregistered firearms.

I don,t for a moment believe Woodworth’s Bill is mean in anyway to protect groups of people from being declared non-human.

Just a refresher because we always need to examine harper’s stance on anything that has to do with anything anywhere at all times:

Harper’s denials:

"A Conservative government will not be bringing forward, will not be supporting, and will not be debating the abortion laws in this country. I've been clear on that and, frankly, I think that's put the matter to rest." - Harper (January 11, 2006)

"Very clearly I am against reopening that debate," he said. "That is my position, now and in the past five years as well, and as long as I am prime minister, we will not reopen the debate on abortion. We will leave the law as it stands."  - Harper  (April 21, 2011)

 “The Prime Minister has been very clear, our government will not reopen this debate.” -  Justice Minister Rob Nicholson (Feb. 28, 2012)

Harper runs the show.  We know that.  He thinks he can reassure the majority of Canadians – the more sane ones… 

h/t BCL

…while appealing to the rabid nut jobs.

He’s a liar who has no respect at all for Canadians.  We aren’t stupid enough to be swayed by semantics.   He can’t claim that a motion to discuss the fetus as a human being does not re-open abortion debate since abortion is termination of a fetus and legal because a fetus is not a human being under our laws.

I don’t think he intends to get into a full blown debate right now since he still hasn’t the extent of control over Parliament, the public service, communications, the legal system, and media as he wants, but he’ll let this one float near the top, run targeted fund raising campaigns on it, and let the discussion become more frequent and mainstream as time goes on.  Eventually, if he holds onto power long enough, he will have to introduce it or risk fragmenting his party as it not only moves further right, but forces Canada along with it.  The further right our laws go, the further right they will be pushed.  It is extremely naive and dangerous to believe harper will never re-open the abortion debate simply because most Canadians would rebel.  Long form census, Bill C-30, omnibus crime bill, government sanctioned torture, illegal election activities...

Stand on guard for Canada.