04.02.2010 07:54 AM

Good Friday bits and pieces

  • Who’s winning? Well, no one, actually.  As I told the Globe’s lovely and charming Gloria yesterday, the Harper Reformatories can’t get anywhere near majority territory – and the margin, still, is more or less the margin of error.  If folks are feeling good, it’s because of the weather.  Not what’s happening, or not happening, in Ottawa.
  • Which leader leads? I don’t put much stock in online-only polls: they sacrifice random sampling, and therefore accuracy, for lower costs for the pollster.  That said, Ignatieff clearly needs to address the fundamentals, here – and, in particular, with women voters.  Losing further ground with Canadian women would be very, very unhelpful.
  • The Google Rule: Too many politicos, of all stripes, do the kind of stupid stuff “Happy Fingers” Guergis’ staff did.  They’ve been doing it for a long time, in fact.  In the digital age, however, it’s very risky behaviour – because a one-second Google search will tend to expose you.
  • Coulter’s cabal: Gerry Caplan pens an important column about how assorted extremists who – as Jim Keegstra, Ernst Zundel and assorted others did before them – profess to be preoccupied with “free speech,” when their main preoccupation is the freedom to propagate hate against pretty much everyone else.  Worth reading.
  • The Creba verdict: The tragic death of this young woman didn’t just change Toronto, as the Star headline suggests – it changed the country. After that terrible day, my friends at Ipsos subsequently showed, Stephen Harper took the lead over Paul Martin – and he never looked back, ending 13 years of Liberal rule.  The income trust issue was not what defeated the Liberal government – it was law and order.  And if the issue is law and order, conservatives always tend to win.
  • Happy iPad weekend! My kids will be in Ottawa this weekend – so I will be road-tripping Stateside, to line up and purchase Apple’s latest gadget for me and one of my many lawyers.  Watch this here web site for regular updates and W@AL instalments about my quest.  I’m betting I won’t get one – but it’ll be entertaining to try.
  • Finally, from my friend Rachel, currently in France – the definition of redundancy:


  1. Suzanne says:

    You mean Ignatieff’s abortion pushing ways isn’t winning back women voters?

    I note that you fail to mention that Ignatieff is losing ground among Catholics, too.

  2. MississaugaPeter says:

    Hi Warren! In January on your iReader post, I left the web address to preregister to get one. I took my own advice and have 3 CONFIRMED waiting for me at the Walden Galleria tomorrow. I am willing to give one up as a retainer for my eventual run against Carolyn Parrish as mayor of Mississauga.

    • Warren says:

      That’s where I’m going! Are you teasing me? How can I get one of the ones you reserved, if not?

      • MississaugaPeter says:

        Teasing you about Carolyn Parrish? That someone would be prepared to actually pay you to help defeat her (when you would probably do it for free)?

        Or the other part, about the iPads. Yah, I got 3 confirmation emails (one for myself, wife, and 1 of 4 children) for 3 iPads with Wi-Fi 64GB at $699 each (the most expensive ones). My wife and daughter don’t care about them but I promised to pay for them to shop while I attended the free workshops and had the Specialists help me set up.

        Heads up, the email states: “Pickup Date and Time April 3 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Please note that your reservation will be held only until 3 p.m. on April 3. After 3 p.m., iPad will be available on a first-come, first-served basis while supplies last.”

        Yah, you are a good guy. I’ll drop one off at your office on Monday if you don’t procure one. But ONLY on the condition it is for you or one of your children (and not your employee, not because I don’t like your employees, but because I have many more of my own staff who would take me up on an offer such as this).

        • Warren says:

          Are you here? Just talked to folks at Apple – they say some nuts will be lining up at 2am! I won’t go there that early, but will go sometime after 6am to conduct some exciting interviews. I’m at wkinsella@hotmail.com if you want to conspire in advance.

      • Eugene Parks says:

        geeks r us

  3. Tceh says:

    “The income trust issue was not what defeated the Liberal government – it was law and order.”

    Can anyone explain why the Lib’s are ignoring the Income Trust issue? The thing that swung an entire class of Canadian small investors to vote Harper in Jan 2006 was his assurance that he would not touch the Income Trust sector. Harpers October 2006 reversal to double tax trusts destroyed this sector and nobody seems willing to offer a fix. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9mibZYpVPY

    Income Trusts offered a great choice to Canadian Seniors who did not have a pension plan in place and need income to fund their retirement.

    The conservatives misled Canada and offered nothing but redacted documents as their justification for their actions on Income Trusts. Does this look familiar to anyone following the Afghan Detainee issue? http://www.caiti.info/resources/fla_docs.pdf

    • billybud says:

      I hold 12 income trusts and 10 have regained all or more of their value. Even those whick have converted to corporation status are paying same distribution. This seems to be a dead issue.

      Probably 95% of Canadian could care less about Afghan detainees. Another come and gone issue.

  4. Jon Evan says:

    An iPad! Sweet! What a great weekend prospect. And just in time for you to use the iPad to read up on the weekend news at:


  5. james smith says:

    I love your bits & pieces pieces to pieces.

    If I may some random points these pieces provoke:

    Who’s winning / Which Leader:
    My gut tells me the present PM has been successful in being more or less boring, so outside his base most folks couldn’t care less who is the PM. On the flip side Iggy has not connected with folks. If my Mum & Wife are reluctant supporters (I’ll vote for him but…) then you’re right, he has some work to be doing.

    The Google Rule:
    What I don’t get is how some folks don’t seem to get this. I mean have they HEARD of the Interweb?

    Coulter’s Cabal
    Mr C’s article is spot on. The person he speak of has a fondness for all sorts of publicity:
    Rachel Maddow is onto something conservative US lawmakers have been up to in DC:

    The Creba Case:
    Sad on so many levels. Not the least is the lost generation of children gone bad due directly to cuts to youth at risk programmes made by a former Ontario Premier, who’s colleagues are now in power in Ottawa. We may claim to be rational, but folks vote with their gut. For me we should end this phony war on drugs that only harms the innocent, inflates police budgets & makes organized crime rich.

    Happy iPad
    Kicking myself that my wife got that Mulch of Merd Sony Reader for Christmas. Great article by my fav Pommy Polyglot Stephen Fry:

    Bureau of the Department of Redundancy Department:

  6. Patagonia says:

    “Ignatieff clearly needs to address the fundamentals, here – and, in particular, with women voters.”

    Bad day at the office: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw7jT938pi0

    Women should make no mistake about it – reproductive choice is in grave danger. And the only thing that is slowing Harper in going the distance in imposing his reform views on women’s bodies? The polls. That scares the hell out of me. Human rights issues dependent on whether the “majority” agree.

    Pro-Choice Canadians: http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2010/04/canadians-decisively-pro-choice-on-abortion-april-1-2010/

    Okay, withstanding against the notwithstanding, for now.

    On to the matter at hand: I am disgusted with last week’s Liberal clusterfuck. Liberals voting against reproductive health? Whipping is in order and maybe more than one kind. What issue should be whipped if not this one – corporate taxes?! The right to choose is a human right. albeit relevant only to half of humans, a fundamental human right. If there are still Liberal representatives (which, apparently, there are) who find the issue of choice a conscientious one, I would advise them to check with their conscience when deciding on whether or not to have one. But NOT in the House where they represent ME. Iggy: I’m the Liberal BASE and you’ve shaken your foundation at the core. You heard it hear first. Get your shit together.

  7. Welby says:

    I’m still a Ignatieff supporter and have been since the leadership race. We should all remain focused on fighting Stephen Harper.

  8. parnel says:

    Yes yes and yes again

  9. CQ says:

    Sadly I would add that it was Holly Jones’ horrible murder of 2003 that, in part, changed my general voting from centre-left to centre-right. Yet my neighbouring political area of Parkdale High Park has continued with landslide voting of soft-left candidates at all levels and in all elections.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.