Blogging on The Road

Frequently, a blogger will put up a post questioning the value of spending so much time and passion fighting for change in a world that often seems incredibly hostile to progressive actions and ideas, or at the very least a species that is disinterested and apathetic in the face of its own impending destruction.  Some get over it in a week or two, some take a break, other shut down completely vowing never, ever to get caught up in such a frustrating, seemingly pointless endeavour again - only to return because something, some nebulous thing will not let them remain silent.

I read The Road by Cormac McCarthy awhile ago and recently watched the film directed by John Hillcoat and written by Joe Penhall.  Without giving away the story for those who haven’t seen it: the film, on the surface, is about a father and son in a post-apocalyptic world where some undefined disaster has pretty much destroyed every living thing on the planet except the odd dog and a few humans.  The duo travel a road, heading south in the hopes of finding a less hostile environment.

Some people I’ve spoken with found the film depressing.  Not me.  McCarthy uses a tactic Hemingway was known for: take a character or two, expose them to some real bad shit, strip them of nearly everything they need or value, torture them a little more with real bad shit, then pull  back to see what’s left.

“The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places.”  That quote by Hemingway is the central theme to many of his novels, and McCarthy is offering us a similar view, among other things.  Both Hemingway and McCarthy know they need to expose the horrible, dark aspects of human beings and the worlds they are exposed to - without the slightest embellishment, before they can move on to lift us to a place where we can hope, and more importantly, where we can believe in the viability of those hopes.  They do this not to bring us down, but because they know we either suspect or will eventually learn that the obscene bird of night does in fact exist.

Many of us know real bad shit happens, that it is going to get worse, and there may not be a whole hell of a lot we can do to stop it.  Others suspect the real bad shit is there, but would rather not acknowledge it, at least not in its entirety.  What can be depressing is wondering why we should keep fighting if the chances of diverting the bad shit are vanishingly slight.

All of that, and back to why do we keep blogging.

At one point in the film/book, the father tells his son that they are the good guys and must carry the fire.  The boy tries to learn from his father what makes a person a good guy, but eventually, he, through his own innate being and despite all of his horrible experiences along the road reveals to his father what aspects of being human really must be preserved in carrying the fire.

That the boy shows us these finer aspects of humanity are inborn in some and can survive against all odds, and that they are worth keeping alive for future generations in view of a time when people will be ready to ready to build a better world - that is uplifting.

And that, I think, is why some of us keep blogging despite the apathy of others, despite the opposition put forth by greed and ignorance, and irrespective of the knowledge that great suffering and loss lies ahead for our species.

I have the greatest respect and fondness for my fellow bloggers who carry the fire.  I admire their honesty, their burning passion to expose and preserve truth.  Films such as The Road remind me of that fragile, infinitely precious flame that is the best of being human: the driving need to help shape and guard a world where all human beings are equal and valued equally by each other, a world where this belief is never compromised for the exclusive benefit of a few.

Big Daddy tells his minions: do as I say, not as I do.

Guergis has “one of the worst meltdowns a staff member of Charlottetown Airport says he's ever seen,”  then four days later, Jean-Pierre Blackburn nearly had the cops called on him when he took “strong issue with security guards at the Ottawa airport who refused to let him on a plane with a bottle of tequila,” prompting negative press indicating that gee whiz, Canadians really don’t like paying wages to people who feel they are above the law, after which Steve realizes Canadians aren’t completely asleep and decides that he needs to save his own miserable ass by having the PMO say he “will issue an edict to his ministers, reminding them that they're not above the law.”   H/t CC

Impolitical points out that Steve the Arrogant really needs a lesson in respecting the law himself.

Mr. Prorogation who breaks parliamentary convention with ease, Mr. Not-So-Fixed-Election-Date Law, Mr. Defy-Parliamentary-Order-on-Document-Production, Mr. PMO-Instructs-Ministries-to-Disobey-Access-to-Information-Laws...Mr. all of these things is going to issue an edict to his ministers reminding them that they're not above the law. Uh huh. What is it they say, the fish rots from the head. Or do as I say, not as I do?

But really.  We were all kids, once, and we know that eventually, all the do not rules mean nothing if the parent pushing them violates the rules themselves.

Air transport security?  Let’s look back to 2006 and see what example Big Daddy set for his MPs:

... on a recent trip, the Prime Minister was asked by a flight attendant to turn off his cellphone and BlackBerry. Mr. Harper declined. The pilot then made a request, saying it was for safety purposes. The PM relented. But, at the end of the journey, one of his staffers gave the pilot some news: His services would no longer be required on prime ministerial trips.

I guess respecting the law doesn’t apply to egocentric sociopaths who think the rest of the universe is full of shit and destined to be ruled by said sociopath.

Because Big Daddy knows best.  And he is, afterall, Big Daddy.

There's a word for that...

...oh yeah...

And how many pregnancies have you had, Lawrence Cannon?

The Conservative government has offered an explanation for why it will exclude contraception from its initiative to improve the health of mothers in poor countries: Birth control doesn't fit with saving lives.

"It does not deal in any way, shape or form with family planning. Indeed, the purpose of this is to be able to save lives," Mr. Cannon told the Foreign Affairs committee.

Riiiiight.

I wonder if Cannon has ever been to a puppy mill. 

Here is a 12-years-old dog in very frail condition (after she was been rescued and treated), a Athrowaway mom@ from a puppy mill. Her front feet are permanently crippled and she is unable to walk properly . Too many pregnancies and no exercise leached the calcium out of her bones.  

It stands to reason that if the mother suffers from deficiencies, her pups will not fare well resulting in health issues, and even early death in some cases.

Now consider a human female deprived of birth control.  Her body has no chance to recover from one pregnancy as she faces the possibility of getting pregnant again.  She may be breast feeding a baby while pregnant.  Give her a few years, she could end up, pregnant while breastfeeding and caring for a half dozen or so kids under the age of twelve.

Think of this woman living in poverty - belonging to the group Cannon wants to deny birth control to so that the Harper party of Canada doesn=t alienate its base - and think how her and her children=s health will be affected as she exhausts herself caring for her brood and cannot come up with enough healthy food for her kids and herself.

Look at this woman as she gets pregnant yet again, and see how she suffers a miscarriage because her body is just too unhealthy to spare anything for a foetus.  Watch as she dies far younger her sisters in Canada who have access to birth control and can work on their health between planned pregnancies, can take the time needed to raise their children, can feed them quality food so that they are not as likely to catch whatever illness is travelling the neighbourhood that week.. 

Now, Cannon, you pompous, self-righteous bastard - tell us again how birth control doesn't fit with saving lives.  Or better yet, get a woman living in extreme poverty with 8 kids and preggers with #9 to tell us.  If she has the energy.

(photo)

Does anyone not see death's shadow here?

You have blood on your hands for that, Larry.

Seriously, Flaherty, just shut up.

The evil leprechaun failed to see the economic crisis coming, even mocking those who warned of its inevitability, swore he would not run a deficit, was way off several times predicting how much the deficit would be when finally forced to acknowledge there would be one, and economists overwhelmingly state that his current plan to reduce the deficit is, metaphorically speaking, something Sunshine Care Bear alone would believe.

Hard not to laugh at this news, were it not so painfully embarrassing:

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says other developed nations should come up with clearer plans on how they are going to get their weighty budget deficits under control.

So just shut the hell up, Jimbo.  Besides, the international financial community has the real deal giving advice.

Oh no!!!! Cannon is an anti-semite and anti-Canadian!!!!!!!

Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon is taking a harder line against Israel's controversial decision to build settlements in East Jerusalem and now says he condemns the plan.

Condemnation coming from a foreign affairs minster would constitute something of a threat, would it not?  A warning of sorts?  As in we will not tolerate this, will n ot support it, and will exert pressure to force Israel to pull back?

Well, then.
(Emphasis mine)

“Our government believes that those who threaten Israel also threaten Canada, because, as the last world war showed, hate-fuelled bigotry against some is ultimately a threat to us all, and must be resisted wherever it may lurk.”

“In this ongoing battle, Canada stands side-by-side with the State of Israel, our friend and ally in the democratic family of nations. We have stood with Israel even when it has not been popular to do so, and we will continue to stand with Israel, just as I have always said we would.” - Harper, May, 2008.

Figures Harper would change his tune (but let Cannon spout the words) once the U.S. took a stance.

But then, we all know that what Harper has "always said" is less than a passing whim.

The alternative should include the universe and all it contains

I went to a Liberal fund raiser/idea exchange last week.  Dave Remington, Liberal candidate for Lanark/Lennox/Frontenac was there, but David McGuinty was the main speaker.  We were all invited to ask questions, give suggestions, voice concerns.

McGuinty (that’s David, federal MP and Environment critic - not to be confused with his brother Dalton who is Premier of Ontario - a provincial politician :) ) was, as most in attendance said, inspiring.  The biggest lift the group got was from his desire to hear what we had to say, and his intentions to continue holding meeting such as that one - but free- to see what direction the Liberal party should take, and what Canadians would like to see for Canada by 2017.

A common concern/question dealt with having no clear alternative to the Harper government.  People asked why Harper could not break out of his 30 something percentage of support, and why the opposition groups were stalled.

I think one big reason is (other than Harper being a creepy fuck), that the conservatives have settled into a very concrete, boxed in mentality which is reflected in their speeches, policies, and platforms.  The past few months, we have heard over and over that the economy is the number one priority.  Most other policy suggestions are interpreted through their dollar value; goals are short term with concrete, shiny results (cutting the GST); and less physically tangible ideas such as tolerance, compassion, quality of life, creativity, fun(!), and even research without a concrete, specific goal are given little attention.

Space research is a good example of how the right and left differ in the concrete/abstract.

One of my co-pilots believes we should not spend money on space research.  He believes there are more important things needing funding.  While space research may not be a top priority, I don’t agree that spending money on it is a waste, or even something we should sacrifice at this time.

Besides the obvious scientific knowledge we gain through space exploration, there are those less tangible benefits that carry us forward as a species.  Space exploration reminds us that there are far more possibilities in our future as a species than we perceive here, focused on and ound to this little planet.  It also encourages us to imagine, and imagination is an essential tool in developing ideas and creating new technology.  It helps us to understand that the universe is larger than our planet, and causes us to explore our own place and role in time and space.

Look at how so many people got fired up over the Olympics.  Many said they felt inspired, encouraged by what human beings could do.  The achievements of a few helped others to believe in the power of the human spirit, in wonderful possibilites, that a person reach should exceed their grasp.

Space exploration helps us to understand that there is more, far, far more to our future and our world that our day-to-day existence.  This is why the arts have value, why education must include literature, philosophy, music.

That reach for something better, that grasp of the importance of the abstract is what keeps, in part, the conservatives in their self-made box.  It is what the opposition parties need to promote, not merely to win more seats, but because without feeding those wonderful abstract apsects of Canadians, we become more drone-like every day.  We focus on getting by, not on excelling.  We focus on existing, not on experiencing all that it means to be a human being.

Concrete policy is absolutely necessary, but reminding us of what we are capable of as creatures with imaginations and beings with compassion would fire up a population that is sliding into the state of the living dead.  It offers hope for something better, and isn’t that what so many Canadians are calling for?

You know there’s a catch when a CON asks for your opinion.

Jimbo Prentice wants to know what Canadians think of his proposed environmental policy.  So far, the response from critics has been less than kind.

The website allows feedback and the deadline for submitting comments is July 12, 2010. The consultation comes as the government’s environmental policy has taken a sustained attack in the wake of the federal budget.

So why ask us for more feedback, especially when this government seems to be very selective of what comments it pads its findings with?

More than one person with an interest in the environmental file has pointed out that the Federal Sustainable Development Act requires the government to develop a Federal Sustainable Development Strategy by June 26, 2010. There is a legally-required 120-day consultation period written into the Act.

So, says one of them, “all Mr. Prentice is doing is obeying the law and holding a consultation - late. His government forced him to break the law and miss the deadline when they prorogued Parliament, though, so the comment period closes more than two weeks after the final strategy is required to be completed.”

Oh...a CON broke the law...I see...

Dodo can’t do grammar (or reason)

And she doesn’t care about cops.

Well just look!  I couldn't find a thing on her blog about this poor man. 

It gets worse, Ladies and Gentlemen.  MariaS doesn’t care at all about child abuse or child rape.  Not a word did she post on this obscene topic, nor does she follow the ongoing horror.  

MariaS doesn’t care about victims of earthquakes, my fellow bloggers.  It’s true. Don’t take my word for it.  Look for yourselves.  Not a single line has she posted concerning the several earthquakes which took place in Chile recently.

And has anyone seen her posting on this story?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Seems she hates handicapped people as well.

She sure doesn’t have a problem with kiddie porn, either.  Folks, I looked and looked, (and looked!) And nowhere on her site could I find even the slightest mention of this.

What?  She couldn’t care less what happens to aid workers?  Not a word about them either, it seems.

Guess she doesn’t give a damn about Corey Haim,   or Siberian Tigers, or the mutilation of plastic pineapples.

If a blogger is going to slag every single blogger left of a wingnut, she can expect to be challenged on her claims.  However, the nature of the claims in this instance are so mind-numbingly nonsensical that the use of standard logic as a method of argumentation here is utterly pointless.  Hence, my use of the absurd.

The brilliant hypothesis of MariaS:

Canadian Liberals and NDP bloggers do not care about Nigerians hacked to death

MariaS’ incredibly clever deductions:

Conservatives care about all human beings. The others care only about winning elections and NOTHING else, absolutely nothing else. How can these people live with themselves?

Her supporting evidence?  Nada.  Zilch.  Zippo.

Sure, MariaS.,  Blogging for Khadr’s return to Canada is a real election shoe-in, right?

Concern over violation of the Geneva conventions and Canada’s complicity, outrage over child rape being committed by members of the clergy, honour given to our veterans, concern expressed for our troops, taking time to celebrate the day, advocating equality...no one left of the insane asylum housing right wing extremists ever, ever blogs about those things.  Never ever.

This is not the first time MariaS has attempted to imitate Canadian Cynic’s posts concerning the sound of crickets in wingnut-land when it comes to certain topics, but unlike CC, she does not support her claims with any proof, and she lies.  Lies, and lies, and lies.

So, having opened herself to criticism through yet another moronic attack on every damn person (which includes 900 here) left of the fanatic right fringe dwellers, I feel bound by a respect for the English language to take issue with her claim that Dodo Can Spell.  There are times when the line between spelling and grammar can be rather hazy, and I don’t read Dodo enough to know if  MariaS can spell better than a fifth grader, but I can say with certainty that her grammar is appalling.

I challenge all of you elitists (you know, you educated folks) to a grammar test for beginners.

Find the grammatical errors (From MariaS’ above referenced post)

(Tip: most sentences contain more than one error.)

Ladies and Gentlemen, if you had any doubt about the lowliness of the opposition parties, lay them to rest forever.

These are the kind of people who pass themselves off as progressives and lovers of all races and all cultures.

As at 12:15 PM, March 9, I could find nothing but blogs about Afghan detainees, Khadr and as usual brainless ones about Pain.

The difference between the Conservative bloggers and all these others should be is as clear as a summer's day.

No matter what the Muslims do, even if a Muslim were to chop off their mothers' heads, they would remain "mum" about that too.

Is it fear of Muslims or are these people after the Muslim vote no matter what.

Compare their silence to the bloggers on the Conservative aggregate...

Am I being harsh, maybe even cruel attacking her grammar?  Probably.  However, I am fed up with accusation by people like her who scream “How rude!  How uncivil!” at some (or in MariaS’ case, all) bloggers left of the bat-shit crazies, and have no problem lying, distorting people’s words, and applying their own brand of highly unimaginative insults. 

I’m fed up with bloggers who embrace ignorance and hope to pull others down to their level rather than make any effort at bettering themselves.

We, left of the rabid right, are often accused in one breath of being bleeding hearts and uncaring of others.  Well, I have no problem condemning any rude, illiterate, ignorant, lying, racist who tries to spread their lies on the Net or elsewhere.  Lying should be challenged.  Pig-ignorance should be discouraged.

Free speech is a right we constantly fight to preserve.  To those out there doing their best to challenge the lies perpetuated through this right, thanks!

If there was a hell for fat, lying sacks of shit who have no integrity...

...this whore would surely end up there.

 “When I went to the school of hard knocks, we were told to be fair and balanced,” Duffy said. “That school doesn’t exist any more...”  - Duffy      

And of course, the Afghan detainees issue is the Liberals’ fault.

Catherine Swift should mind her own business.

Swift is the head of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, so you would think she would be working on private sector issues.

However, for weeks leading up to the budget, several articles a week have come out with her and C.D. Howe Institute aggressively attacking public servants’ benefits - pensions in particular.

Upon hearing of the wage freeze for public servants, Swift said it’s a good start, but there’s a lot more to do.  She will be meeting with Day of Treasury Board to discuss putting the hatchet to public servants’ benefits and pensions. 

Why is this any of her business?  Both Swift and C.D. Howe point to the gap between public and private sector pensions, chanting on about how unfair this is. 

Yes, there is a large gap between benefits of private industry workers - except in the upper echelons, that is, where Swift and the C.D. Howe bunch probably nestle in comfort, but the answer isn’t to take away from those who fought for years to get a decent wage and pension, the solution, the fair and necessary solution, is to improve the lot of private sector workers.

And that is why Swift wants to take away what was given through fair bargaining, in good faith, over the years.  Pension is in great need of reform in the private sector.  Many workers have no protection should the company they work for claim bankruptcy.  While tax dollars bail out corporations and CEOs continue to get high wages, keep their pensions, and get ridiculous bonuses, the workers are often left with nothing despite having paid into pensions for years.

With a rapidly aging population, the pension crisis is demanding action in the private sector.  Servants of the money god, like Swift, are looking for a way out of giving workers what they deserve and have earned, so they go with the finger pointing thing.  It’s what Thomas Walkom recently described in the Toronto Star as reverse class resentment.

It is an excellent article and should be read in its entirety.  He goes through the history of unions, why they arose, the impact they had, and describes how things have reversed.

Today, class resentments have been turned on their head. The focus of anger is not the silk-hatted capitalist but his unionized workers, with their job protection guarantees, their pension plans and their good wages.
Increasingly, in the world of media and popular culture, it is not the rich who are blamed for their excesses but the poor - the undeserving welfare recipient, the shiftless single mother, the employment insurance cheat. Resentment has become a potent tool of the right.

...For the Harper Conservatives, all of this is useful. First, it removes the focus from the country's real pension problems: Most Canadians don't have workplace pensions; those who do have found their plans savaged by this recession.

Walkom closes by telling us of the dangers this approach poses:

...The left's resentments were predicated on the notion that if some are privileged, all should be. For all of its problems (and resentment is a difficult force to control), it was at least optimistic. At its best, it encouraged people, through their governments, to improve the lot of those who were hurting.                
 
The new resentment is based on the presumption that if I don't have something, neither should you. Its aim is not to improve anyone's lot but to cut down to a common level of misery those uppity enough to think they deserve better.

Harper’s government: mean, resentful, creators of misery.

A finger pointing budget.

Tax cuts for corporations, cuts to the public services, de-regulation, all under the excuse of erasing the deficit.

What we end up with is a push to sell off more of Canada’s resources and companies by inviting more foreign investment, privatization of more public services, and fewer rules and less accountability for both investors and those taking over public services.

Harper had already made up his mind to do these things long ago.  The budget simply offered superficial justification for these moves.

He has been gunning for the public service for years, decades, actually.  He, like all reformers, believes in smaller government, and privatization of as many services as possible.  Everything is about a small group of people making as much money as possible.  And smaller government does not mean less control by the ruling party.  It means less oversight by independent agencies, fewer studies, less accountability to the public.

Harper started putting this plan into action by replacing as many independent oversight agents as possible.  Now he wants to reduce the number of those watchdogs.  This was announced before the budget, and it had nothing to do with reducing the deficit.

The federal government should consider "consolidating" the growing number of watchdogs and other oversight bodies, which can take up too much of management's time and make public servants too risk-averse, says the prime minister's hand-picked advisory committee on the public service.

Those poor public servants!  Somehow, I doubt they would agree with this assessment.  The oversight agencies and watchdogs help protect them from partisan deputy ministers (appointed by the ruling party) who are in turn pressured by Ministers.  Remove the watchdogs, and you remove impartiality and accountability.

The Speech from the Throne gives us an idea of what Harper has in mind with the removal of watch dogs:

He plans to:  untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals, replacing it with simpler, clearer processes that offer improved environmental protection and greater certainty to industry...Too often, however, grassroots efforts are hobbled by red tape. Too often, local solutions are denied access to government assistance because they do not fit the bureaucratic definition of the problem. Too often, the efforts of communities falter not on account of a lack of effort or heart, but because of a lack of expertise to turn good ideas into reality.

His solution? (L)ook to innovative charities and forward-thinking private-sector companies to partner on new approaches to many social challenges.

Great.  Oversight provided by those very same self-interest groups and profit oriented agencies whose self-serving pressures oversight agencies are meant to protect the public from.

Harper also plans to cut 245 senior jobs in the public service.  And who will be performing their duties?  A large part of staffing has already been transferred to deputy ministers, so it is likely that we will see much of the same political interference in other areas.

Steve plans to make 40% of cuts he says are need to reduce the deficit by making those cuts to departments and the public service in general.  That means many, many jobs will be cut, wages and benefits will be affected, and quality of service will suffer.

Here’s where the finger pointing comes in.  He has told us that the scheduled increase in June for public servants won’t be cut, but wages may be frozen after that.  So far, he hasn’t definitely said he’ll go after public servants’ pensions and benefits, but that door isn’t closed.  He has even said he won’t lay anyone off, except those senior managers.

But here’s the catch: departments will not be getting increases (except for DND and international aid) and they are furthermore expected to reduce their expenses.  While dealing with less funding, they are expected to come up with the pay increases promised by the Harper government in an agreement between unions and Treasury Board.

Harper welches on an agreement with public servants, and when departments have to lay some off to meet the funding cuts, Stevo can point his finger at the departments and blame them for the lay-offs.  He can also blame them for poor services and cuts to pensions and benefits.

Then, after forcing this evisceration of our public services, he can rant on about how much better the private sector would be at providing for the public.

Sure.  Public service now provided by private industry bent on making as much profit as possible with as little accountability as possible.

Friday night tunes for our own Helena

Hall and Oats



Elton John

Happy fucking birthday indeed, Helena

You delicate flower.

The tautologically-challenged Helena Guergis issued a written statement Thursday saying she was "rushing to catch a flight" last week and "spoke emotionally" to airport staff.

Let’s help her with the truth, shall we?  (emphasis mine) According to a letter (and obviously supported since Guergis saw the need to do what few CONs do: issue an apology) -

...Guergis and an aide were at the Air Canada ticket counter five minutes before the flight was to depart and they were "being so difficult and rude" they were almost denied permission to board.  They berated (the ticket agent) loudly and treated him in a most condescending manner after he told them some of their excessive bags were too large to be carry-on and should be checked.

At security screening...Guergis initially refused to remove her boots, which set off the metal detector. She then "huffily" removed her boots, "slammed" them into a bin and groused to the security screener: "Happy f**king birthday to me. I guess I'm stuck on this hell hole. (P.E.I.)"

Guergis is correct in stating her behaviour was inappropriate.  If you or I tried that at an airport, we would at the very least be removed from the airport to find another way home.  This behaviour is especially horrendous coming from a Minister.  It is abusive, and shows contempt for the Atlantic province.

Guergis’ show of contempt did not stop there, either.  She goes on to show contempt for people who are simply trying to do their job.

Told at one point that she should have checked in at least two hours before her flight's departure time, the writer says Guergis shouted: "I don't need to be lectured about flight time by you. I've been down here working my ass off for you people."

The very day that Baird announced Canadians will have to pay a higher airport security tax to make us all safer, Guergis helps him out by showing all of Canada how unstable people can become disruptive and violate security at airports.

Once she cleared security, Guergis allegedly tried to force open a locked door from the pre-boarding area on to the tarmac, where her plane was waiting. Told to wait for an Air Canada representative, Guergis and her aide instead began "screaming and hammering on the soundproof tinted glass that separates pre-board from airside," apparently hoping to catch the attention of an airline representative.

In the world of the CONs, it seems, laws are only meant for those people the members work their asses off for in various hell holes around the country.

Simple solution to your frustration with Canadians, Helena.  If you resent the work so much and have such contempt for people you claim to work for, just quit.  It’s not like we’d miss you.

A long history of discrimination + Cuts to the social safety net + Failure to provide basic services like legal aid, affordable housing and childcare + lack of investment in sectors of the economy employing any significant number of women + bargaining away fundamental rights like pay equity = women highly vulnerable to violence and poverty, rendered invisible and voiceless.

And the PMO’s reaction?  Predictable:

When contacted by CBC News, the Prime Minister's Office said it was "satisfied" with her apology, and that it "closes the matter."

Well, the matter is hardly closed for all Canadians.  Guergis, like other elected politicians, is supposed to work for the people of Canada.  Guergis did not, as she is trying now to say speak emotionally.  She was verbally abusive to people who were trying to do their job, and she violated security procedures at an airport.  An apology doesn’t cut it.  Such behaviour is not written off for anyone else at airports because we are all expected to respect the rights of others and follow security procedures.  An MP who has so little control over their own actions should not be instrumental in shaping laws for others.

Who should the public service bureaucrats be loyal to?

Not, as James Travers says, the government of the day.

Perhaps it is simply imprecise word choice on his part, or lack of expanding on his statement, but these lines do not help people understand the non-partisan nature of the public service, nor why it is necessary to respect that the public service serves the public, not the elected government:

Certainly the government of the day has every right to expect bureaucrat loyalty.

No, it doesn’t. While it is the duty of the public service to forward government’s will as directed by the Minister in charge (with the exception of the independent agencies who do not have a Minsiter), it is not a question of loyalty. They serve Canada and Canadians, and must fulfill the elected government’s orders within the boundaries of their mandates and as directed by existing legislation which defines the responsibilities of an independent public service.

It would be more accurate to say that the government of the day has every right to expect bureaucrat cooperation and respect for the acts outlining the responsibilities of public servants.

For the public service, it is not at all (and should never be) an issue of loyalty, but of a committment and dedication to following the rules by which they are bound, regardless of who holds the most seats in Parliament. These rules and acts were developed by all of Parliament, over many, many sessions. They are regularly updated and adjusted as public needs change. Never should they be altered to accommodate the goals of a particular party in power.

If the public service was expected to shift loyalties to accommodate elected governments, there would be no stability in the public service and long term planning would be a waste of time.

Travers is also incorrect in what he says about the rights of Prime Ministers when it comes to public servants:

Prime ministers have as much right to set their administration's tone as they have to expect the bureaucracy to execute government's will.

The statement is a little vague, saying that one right is equal to the other, without really defining the range of those rights, but implying that they are considerable.

Yes, the Prime Minister does have some leeway in setting the tone in departments, but once more, existing policies limit that right to safeguard against any PM using public services to forward their own political agendas. We have already seen many cases of abuse of such policies, especially with the harper government - using public service sites to launch attack ads, changing the look of departmental sites so that they appear clones of the CPC ones, ignoring Treasury Board guidelines and introducing terms such as Harper’s Government rather than the Government of Canada.

After all, democracy demands that mandarins advise, ministers decide. Still, enforced silence and reflex compliance are anathemas to the openness and intellectual argy-bargy that are essential to the creation of effective policies that put the nation on the most beneficial course.

Yes. Travers is correct on that point. And by clouding the accountability and the independence of the public service by saying the government of the day has every right to expect (its) loyalty, Travers feeds the very thing he decries: enforced silence and reflex compliance would be the result of loyalty to governments of the day.

I don't want to fund a god's plan, do you?

If someone wants to financially support and help propagate a myth along with its narrow ideology in the name of a mythic creature, hey, that’s their right.  But this should not come out of the tax dollars of people who may not feel the same way: those who believe in a completely different mythos, atheists, or even those who share similar beliefs but are opposed to the goals of the group.

Seems Vic Toews doesn’t agree.  At least when it comes to Youth For Christ, a religious group passing itself off as a youth centre for troubled kids.

Their own mission statement makes it very clear that their agenda is a religious one, extending to mixing church and state.

With a focus on junior and senior high school ministries, YFC Canada aims to take the gospel to the youth of the nation and trust God to surface leaders for the future who can become part of His plan for our nation.

God has a plan for our nation, does he?  But he needs our tax dollars to help indoctrinate vulnerable youth to accomplish it?  Mm-hmmm...

This group doesn’t just want to take the gospel to the kiddies, it is actively targeting what it views as vulnerable groups.

Strategy - ...Expanding chapter ministries: "YFC will boldly move into areas where we do not now exist, both geographically and culturally. The aboriginal youth community is a prime area for development."

Yeppers.  Boldly braving hostile lands  and dangerous cultures.  

I find it more than a little obscene that the very religion that abused aboriginals and committed cultural genocide  now seeks to use them to suppress the rights of all Canadians by imposing their religiously driven morality on all citizens through changing our laws according to a two thousand year old book written by several patriarchal types and loosely interpreted by whoever happens to claim to have insight into the will of a non-existent being.  Whew!  Long sentence, yes, but that happens when you try to give clarity to something as nonsensical as a god’s will.

We are committed to a journey of faith fully trusting our Lord to supply the resources and strategies to impact the youth of Canada.

I have trouble believing that this group faithfully trusts their lord to supply resources - for two reasons: first off, I don’t believe in gods.

Secondly: I apparently jabbered in my sleep last night, and what one of my co-pilots took to be nonsense must have been in fact, a magic spell because some god or other monster (which I don’t believe in) later directed me to read this article  and made me read these very lines:

Toews said Youth For Christ's evangelism was irrelevant to the funding process, although CBC reports one of the group's directors contributed to his political campaign.

So with family values  Vic Toews’ palms coincidentally greased,

The Conservative government in Ottawa and Winnipeg's city council are poised to help non-profit Youth For Christ build an $11.7-million, 50,000-square-foot youth centre at the northwest corner of Higgins Avenue and Main Street.

Seems the holy partisan patronage invisible sky monster worked some more magic for his faithful:

That plan, which faces a council vote on Feb. 24, is being lambasted by two opposition councillors and MP Martin, who claim it was rushed through city hall, contravenes Winnipeg's recreation policy and effectively shuts out other inner-city organizations.

"Councillors received one page of information about this. It was walked onto (executive policy committee) a week before we have to vote on this. It didn't go through the proper process," said Gerbasi, who shares Martin's concerns about the evangelistic aims of Youth For Christ.

Transcona Coun. Russ Wyatt said it's unfair to give millions to Youth For Christ without even a report from city staff, when the city makes dozens of small community organizations jump through procedural hoops to obtain small amounts of public funding.

I wonder - had the group had been named Youth For Allah, Boys For Buddha or Kids For Krishna, would it have received such funding as easily, or rather, at all? (Yes, that is a rhetorical question)

I was thinking...for just under 7 mill, I could be persuaded to start a youth group as well.

Been thinking of Kids For Cthulhu. 

Should have a pretty good shot since being amoral, such a group can hardly be accused of forcing narrow, religious values on tender, little kiddies.  And since Cthulhu has a physical form, kiddies can strive to emulate his image.

(photo)
It would offer extensive challenges:

And it encourages children to strive for the highest goals:

Cthulhu really has that tough guy image working for him as well.  That's very popular, lately.

Best of all, there’s some terrific Cthulhu rock to lure in the youngsters:

Look! Look!!!!! Look at me, how tough I am!!!!

Some people never really grow up.  They never reach that self-actualization zone where they know who they are, and are comfortable there.

They are the ones who buy expensive showy cars so that others will notice them.  Their sense of their own existence is determined as how they see themselves reflected in others eyes.  They constantly position themselves where they will be noticed, and their actions are meant to garner praise, admiration, and awe.

They feel real only when they believe they are affecting the lives of others.  They talk tough, like they are in control all the time, like they are a force to be reckoned with, like they are a man’s man.

Their language always gives them away.

"The entire planet has been able to witness that Canada is now a major actor when it's time to intervene in natural disasters," Harper said.

So is that why we are helping Haiti?  So the entire planet can witness our greatness?  The disaster, it seems, is but an opportunity for Stevo to flex the countries big, tough, muscles.

And tough we are, according to him.

The purchase and use of C-17 transport planes is an example of the "hard power" requirements of the type of relief work soldiers are now doing in Haiti, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said during a tour of the country.

We used to be wimps, he tells his audience (presumably the entire planet), back when those soft on everything Liberals ran the show.  Hell, even Canada’s policies were soft.

Harper said there was a "time when that kind of heavy-lift aircraft didn’t fit Canada’s soft power policies. But our government bought them for the hard power requirements of today’s world. Now we’re using them for relief work.

But fear not.  No longer will we be wimps in the eyes of the world.  Captain Everything is here to make sure of that.

"What is the moral of the story? To do soft power, you need hard power. You need a full range of capabilities."

I suspect, however, that Steve who has to be the centre of everything, all the time, is really trying to show Canadians, the world, the universe, and everything what a tough guy he is.  What a man’s man.

And they're all gonna look at him.

***more (and better stuff) here.  About Harper's lie in this matter, and an explanation of hard power and soft power.

I hope someone checks the full cost of this

And translates it into potential aid dollars.

Having a world leader go to areas needing help can draw attention to those needs and encourage further action.

However, when that self-centered leader has already made a name for himself as a self-promoting asshole who will use anything and anyone as a photo op, it does nothing more than spread cynicism and cost precious dollars.

There is no reason Harper has to go to Haiti himself to assess the situation.

Claiming Red Fridays for himself, and now this...

Excuse me.  I have to go puke.

Indoctrination - just another Stelmach service.

On the taxpayers’ dollar, of course.

T he Stelmach government plans on taking its energy and environment education blitz to the classroom to inform Alberta youths on the importance of the oilpatch and value of expensive carbon capture and storage technology.   

Some people are saying, well fine, as long as the info is factual, and both sides are fairly presented.

Two problems with that: there aren’t two sides, only facts.  Secondly, Stelmach has already shown he has no intention of striving even for the semblance of balance:

The initiatives were identified in last week's provincial budget documents that also revealed a 12 per cent boost to Energy Department spending and a five per cent cut to Alberta Environment, sparking questions about the government's priorities.

Those damn environmentalist making it harder and harder to sell oil!  That damn environment should have the good grace to just roll over and die - quickly - so we can get on with making more money.

While the government looks to ratchet up its efforts (on behalf of the oil industry) in schools, it intends to cut back on some of its environmental monitoring in the energy sector as a result of budget cuts.

Specifically, it will reduce the frequency of air and water monitoring in areas that have, over recent years, shown positive results and are not near population centres, according to Alberta Environment.

So air and water quality (already showing red flags) affecting school children will not be monitored as well, but those little ones will be told more about the value of selling oil.

Good priorities, there.  Maybe Stelmach can hire a bunch of those defenders of cigarette smoking to eventually inform the kiddies that no, the increase in asthma, cancer, and other deadly diseases has nothing at all to do with the development of those lovely oilsands.

Condolences to family and friends

Cpl. Joshua Caleb Baker

A Harper decision, impetuous?

Hill Times, February 8, 2010 - Angelo Persichilli

Despite that the decision to prorogue Parliament was initially welcomed by most of the Conservative caucus members, there is now a lingering disappointment with the decision. Some are trying to blame the Prime Minister and the PMO. These feelings, gently, but openly emerged during the GTA and Quebec Conservatives' caucus meetings held in the last few weeks. 

Some Conservative MPs, even if not against the decision to prorogue Parliament, were not happy with the PMO's communications plan, or lack of one, to explain to Canadians the reasons for the prorogation. I'm sure that, by now, they have realized that the decision was not in the best interests of the government, and/or its execution was faulty.

Stop trying to cause a reversal of a Harper decision!

Still, they believe that it's too late to go back for two reasons. They don't want Canadians to think the Prime Minister is a weak leader who changes his views with the polls and the Throne Speech is not ready.

So instead Steve does something even dumber. The master strategist sets a fiendishly clever and subtle trap that Professor Moriarty would surely envy:  the clever part - he announces that he will cancel two weeks of parliamentary breaks this spring to try to make up for the six weeks of work he personally cost Parliament when he decided to prorogue it and hopes no one will ask him why the hell he doesn't just go back to work now?

And the brilliantly fiendish part, as delivered by the slavish Gordon O'Connor: "Quite frankly, we would be surprised if the opposition disagreed."

riiiiight....

In which abdominous Steve out-manoeuvres himself.

Still trying to outsmart me, aren't you, mule-skinner. You want me to think that you don't want me to go down there but the subtle truth is you really don't want me to go down there.

Not only did the opposition agree to cancel the breaks, they took the opportunity to say how they have been working even during prorogation, and to shake their heads and ask why the government didn't just go back to work now, if there is so much work to do.


But they don't know that I intend to attack them without mercy!

And it's back to the pathetic, unimaginative, vulgar, dishonest ten percenters misused as attack ads.  (h/t Impolitical)

Sure, Steve, you just keep heading down into that coulee.  Don't let anyone ever, ever cause a reversal of a Harper decision. 

About that whole Canada is better now than four years ago thing, Harper...

This was inevitable.

You have no weight pressuring other governments on respecting democracy when you fail to do it yourself.

The government of Hugo Chavez has responded to Canadian criticism it was "shrinking democratic space" in Venezuela by saying it will take no lessons from an "ultraright" government that "closed" Parliament to avoid an investigation into the handling of Afghan detainees.

Chavez’s government didn’t stop there, either.  It went on to accuse the Harper government of seeking to damage Venezuela itself.

"I am talking of a Canada governed by an ultraright that closed its Parliament for various months to (evade) an investigation over the violation of human rights -- I am talking about torture and assassinations -- by its soldiers in Afghanistan," said Chaderton.

No Canadian has accused our soldiers of torture and assassination.  Accusations from Canadians have been that the elected government knew about, and enabled torture, and that the fault rests with that government’s deliberate cover-up of how they failed to halt the transfer of detainees when they knew they were being handed over to a group that would most likely torture them.

But by riding endlessly on the theme that anyone who seeks an investigation into the transfers is attacking the soldiers, Harper assured the troops would become a target of such attacks.

After a trip to Venezuela, Peter Kent, minister of state for the Americas said Canada was concerned over the Chavez regime's decision to suspend the licences of several cable television stations and over the deaths of two students during protests.

"These events are further evidence of a shrinking democratic space in Venezuela," Kent said in the release. "During my recent visit to Venezuela, I heard many individuals and organizations express concerns related to violations of the right to freedom of expression and other basic liberties."

Uh-huh.

Sort of like this?

By proroguing Parliament to avoid investigations into his own complicity in the Afghan detainee issue, Harper has cost Canada a great deal of credibility and weight in its international efforts toward democratic rights and freedoms.

Bastard.

Best wishes, Jack

 

I'm sorry, I have no words.  Just wishing you the absolute best. 

I'm sure he'd appreciate knowing we care.

laytoj@parl.gc.ca  

Beowulf Award

The Beowulf Award goes to: Marie-France Cloutier, Razmik Panossian and Charles Vallerand
 H/t to Dr. Dawg 


Three senior managers at a government-funded rights agency rocked by allegations of Conservative meddling have been suspended, including one of its longest-serving employees.

The three were among the staff that had earlier declared non-confidence in the Conservative-appointed chairman and two other appointees on the board.
 
We need to support these three, and any others who stand up to the politicization of agencies that are supposed to be non-partisan.  They risk a great deal in defending the principles they were hired to promote and protect.  Every time someone like them speaks out, they are fighting for everyone's right to do so.  We have a responsibility to guard their backs in any way we can.

Stocky Doris Day should be a kindergarten teacher

In a fundamentalist christian school, of course.

His intro memo to the staff at Treasury Board is unprofessional, insincere, childish in the extreme, and insulting to those he addresses.

Day may not realize all of that.  He doesn’t appear to be extremely bright, and he certainly isn’t worldly.

Here are a few excerpts from his memo:

Hello out there in Treasury Board land! As your newly appointed President (I'm still trying to get used to that title), I don't mind telling you I'm feeling a little bit overwhelmed.
 
A few minutes ago, I was looking out of my office window beside the Peace Tower in the direction of the Treasury Board building. I was wondering if I could see any of you from here.
 
The newly prepared briefing books (they look huge) are sitting on the desk in front of me. My briefing sessions are just beginning and I can see that I have a lot to learn.

By trying to sound folksy, chatty, and down-to-earth, he comes across as a fumbling, uneducated guy with no clue as to the nature of his audience.

Did you ever read any of those books written by Richard Scarry? Our kids used to enjoy when we would read one called What Do People Do All Day.

...Now my grandkids will be asking me "What do Treasury Board people do all day, do they take care of Treasures?" I'll say, "Well kind of ..."
 
I'll explain to them that I'll be working with people who work hard every day taking care of the money that the Government gets from all the workers in Canada who pay what's called "taxes," which is the money it takes to run the Government.

Now if Stock were really writing this for his grandkids, this would be fine, but his audience is the staff at Treasury Board.  In addition to making one feel like gagging, this is an extremely patronizing way of addressing adults who have been working at TB for years, some for decades.  They hardly need to hear a dumbed-down version of what they do.

I'm also looking forward to meeting as many of you as possible. The Secretary tells me there are over two thousand of you out there, in Ottawa and from coast to coast. I'm not sure I'll have each of your names memorized by the weekend, but I will get a better idea of "what you do all day" as I get the chance to meet you or at least to hear from you through the magic of email and other sources.

Again, while day is probably trying to sound humourous, his level of address is simply insulting to adults.  If he cannot come up with a genial, but serious intro, he should not have bothered.

So let me say "Thank You" again for "what you do all day". Each of you in your own way is making a difference. I'd like to be a part of that with you.  So for now, it's back to the briefing books. We'll talk again soon. And I'll be telling my grandkids about you.

“Stockwell” “Doris” “Day” should listen to communication advisors who would tell him that “quotation marks” are a “sign” of someone who needs “training” in writing to an “adult” audience.

We’ll talk again soon - patronizing, insincere, just plain stupid and inaccurate.        

I find it somewhat frightening that this bumpkin will be running Treasury Board - sort of.  We all know the real captain will be Stay-the-course, steady-hand-at-the-helm, the Big Guy, Himself.

Bunker mentality on display: these guys listen to their own rhetoric so much they have no clue what Canadians are all about.

The Senate as a soapbox.

Paid for by us.

Meet one of Canada’s newest senators — Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu.
 
The Sherbrooke, Que., native who went on from the tragic murder of his daughter to become one of Canada’s best known advocates for the rights of victims and their families says he plans to use his new job to fight for victims rights and to crack down on the criminals who prey on them.

Boisvenu said he has specific things he wants to achieve in terms of justice and victims rights. At the end of four years he plans to assess his progress and if he has achieved what he came to Ottawa to do, he’ll quit.

Many Senators have their area of interest, an issue they push for relentlessly.  Dallaire fights for human rights, especially the rights of people affected by war; Oliver fights for visible minorities (although I’ve noticed he can be quite silent when his views are not in agreement with those of the conservative government); Ringuette fights for the right of all Canadians to apply for government jobs regardless of where they live in Canada...

But those Senators never claim to be there solely for those issues.

Any Senator will likely bring certain goals to the Senate and will have a point of view already in place.  But by saying he’ll quit once he achieves his preconceived goals on crime and justice, Boisvenu is saying two things - even without debate in the Senate, he has made up his mind what he wants to push for, and that is his sole purpose for serving as a Senator.

The Senate should not be anyone’s personal soapbox, paid for by taxpayers.  Senators must address each issue with a willingness to debate and consider other information and arguments, and they must be as committed to all issues presented for debate and vote.

Maybe a public servant living in that other Canada wrote this.

You know, the Canada Harper says is better now than four years ago?

“The Prime Minister’s action has not only brought additional talent and expertise to the Senate; it has greatly strengthened our efforts to move forward on our tackling-crime agenda.”

“The opposition has obstructed that agenda in the Senate, most notably by gutting Bill C-15 – a bill proposing mandatory jail time for serious drug offences, and a key part of the government’s efforts to fight organized crime.”
“These five new Senators support all our measures,” said Minister Paradis. “And today, we ask the opposition parties to listen to the victims of crime and to support our measures, too.”

That is part of what appears on Justice Canada’s site.

Like all federal departments and agencies staffed by public servants, the website is supposed to be non-partisan.  At all times.

This is important, because if an elected government is allowed to use it to push its ideology, promote its agenda, or attack the opposition, there is a clear conflict of interest and the very real possibility of presenting biassed information.

Nor should tax payer funded sites such as these be used to promote the interests or attack ads of any one party.

This time, all of us tax payers have paid for this partisan attack ad posted by the Conservatives.  Tolerate this, and next year, we could all be paying for similar ads for the Liberal party.  No elected government can be allowed to manipulate public service websites, or those sites become nothing more than political propaganda.  Useless as a source of information to the public.

Public servants, especially those working in communications, understand this.  That is why it is near to impossible that a public servant wrote that conservative message with the intentions of posting it on Justice Canada’s site.

Furthermore, since the statement made on that site is not accurate considering the Conservatives themselves have delayed and even killed their own crime bills, it is even less believable that a public servant wrote it.  That communications person would have done their research, aimed for accuracy, knowing full well that their words will be closely reviewed and edited by several managers.

With several levels of public service managers reviewing the message, errors would have been caught and it is impossible that the partisan nature of the message would not have been caught and addressed.  Unless the message came from the top.  The political top.

"This is a concerted effort on the part of this government to politicize the public service," said Liberal MP Marlene Jennings. "This is not the first time, it is reprehensible and it has to stop." Jennings lodged her complaint with Privy Council Clerk Wayne Wouters over a press release posted on the Justice Department's website

...She wants it removed and Wouters to investigate whether public servants wrote, approved and posted it, or if it was prepared by political staff and posted under their orders. She also wants to know if any bureaucrats objected.

An investigation sounds appropriate.  But with attack after attack on public servants who have been brutalized for trying to do their jobs, will any come forth?  I hope so, but then it’s easy for me to say since I’m not the one risking my job.

More public servants are coming forth, but with the threat of cutbacks in the public service, and a scarcety of jobs in the private sector, they take a great risk in offending their political Minister.

This is why I keep saying we need to support our public servants when they stand up against those who would rather they remain silent.

They work for us.  We should help them do so without threats or harassment.