“Warren Kinsella's book, ‘Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,’ is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.”

- The Washington Times

“One of the best books of the year.”

- The Hill Times

“Justin Trudeau’s speech followed Mr. Kinsella’s playbook on beating conservatives chapter and verse...[He followed] the central theme of the Kinsella narrative: “Take back values. That’s what progressives need to do.”

- National Post

“[Kinsella] is a master when it comes to spinning and political planning...”

- George Stroumboulopoulos, CBC TV

“Kinsella pulls no punches in Fight The Right...Fight the Right accomplishes what it sets out to do – provide readers with a glimpse into the kinds of strategies that have made Conservatives successful and lay out a credible roadmap for progressive forces to regain power.”

- Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics

“[Kinsella] deserves credit for writing this book, period... he is absolutely on the money...[Fight The Right] is well worth picking up.”

- Huffington Post

“Run, don't walk, to get this amazing book.”

- Mike Duncan, Classical 96 radio

“Fight the Right is very interesting and - for conservatives - very provocative.”

- Former Ontario Conservative leader John Tory

“His new book is great! All of his books are great!”

- Tommy Schnurmacher, CJAD

“I absolutely recommend this book.”

- Paul Wells, Maclean’s

“Kinsella puts the Left on the right track with new book!”

- Calgary Herald


The media who applaud this are the same media who’d attack if it ever actually happened



105 Responses to “The media who applaud this are the same media who’d attack if it ever actually happened”

  1. Kelly says:

    One stat he threw out struck me…infant mortality. Canada has slumped almost as badly. Your baby now has a better chance of surviving if you have it in Cuba and Andora. Ireland, as well. I’m not making this up. This is from the CIA. Canada ranks 40th now — not 7th like we used to. Welcome to Jason Kenney’s Canada.

    • Dave Breukelaar says:

      I fully agree that Jason Kenney is a thug, but how is he responsible for this slump in infant mortality?

      • Kelly says:

        He’s not personally responsible obviously but he embodies the thinking, worldview and policy orientation that leads to these sorts of deadly outcomes. Wait til a refugee dies under his watch because someone didn’t get their heart meds. Would the college drop out know-nothing be directly responsible then? Time will tell.

      • Tim Sullivan says:

        Well, no one is saying he is responsible for the killings, but, where was he during those deaths?

        Too soon?

    • The Doctor says:

      That’s funny, Kelly — when I look up infant mortality rankings, I don’t come across the same results as you:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

      In this ranking, Canada is 24th, Cuba 33rd.

      I’m not making this up.

      And BTW Andorra is not some 3rd world backwater — I’ve been there. It’s quite a lovely place, perched on the Pyrennes between France and Spain.

  2. Dan says:

    You’re right. Bill Mahar makes the same point all the time and he’s ignored 80% of the time and attacked the other 20%.

    http://youtu.be/T8UqdPKbpWM

    Plus he’s a comedian. No “serious” journalist would dare say this.

    Imagine during the health care debate they actually compared the American health care system to other systems via COST and BENEFIT.

    Nope, that’s not big media’s job.

    And now Harper wants to follow them off a cliff.

  3. Dude Love says:

    What was more interesting in the video is the minute people see or hear something shocking, out come the smartphones to record every moment adding to the ephemeral nature of events and media.

  4. Mark McLaughlin says:

    Since you brought up Jason Kenny, are you making the inference that this current government’s immigration policies have something to do with infant mortality rates?

    I’d be interesting to know the rates across demographics but you provide only some cryptic back hand without context. I would suspect that Kenny and his policies have nothing to do with it. The territories are the only places with rates moving notably in the wrong direction which would suggest the problem largely in the aboriginal community. The healthy affluent population is having fewer and fewer babies these days too, multiplying the impact the poor rural population has.

    There was also a study done by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and half a dozen universities that discovered a wide range in reporting standards for this ranking system. Some countries don’t even count early premature deliveries where we do. Adjust based on a common standard and our ranking improves dramatically.

    Lies, damned lies and statistics as they say.

    Actually taking the time to learn something might hurt your attempts at idiodic drive by smears though, so feel free to carry on doing as you do. The rest of us will discount your opinions accordingly.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Mark…you can’t talk sense to a Liberal.

      They only want to SOUND like they give a damn…..and your facts and statistics are raining on their self-righteous parade.

      They don’t seem to understand that knowing what the problem actually is…..is the first step in fixing it. If the cause of a problem makes a Liberal feel bad…they ignore it, and find someone else to blame.

      • que sera sera says:

        “Mark…you can’t talk sense to a Liberal.”

        Which pretty much explains JamesHalifax daily dose of nonsense on this Liberal website.

        Funny how all these “unofficial spokespeople” can never see their own reflection when they hold up a mirror.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          It’s only nonsense to you Que sera sera….because you lack the mental capacity to comprehend.

          As for the mirror….nope, sorry. I only use it to shave, though I’m sure you spend a lot of time standing in front of one trying to convince yourself that you are a caring and compassionate liberal. After all…for a Liberal…appearence is everything.

          • Jason King says:

            “After all…for a Liberal…appearence is everything.”

            Oh of course. This explains everything.

            Good thing Harper fired all those communications and PR staff as well as those stylists and image consultants. Seeing as he’s not a liberal he obviously doesnt care about appearance.

            Sometimes James I wonder if you are the greatest Liberal satirist never known because some of the stuff you say is incredibly funny. And the irony of a man making consistently uniformed statements than decrying others for their perceived inferior intelligence.

            If you are a comedian then well played sir. If not, well then school was obviously wasted on you.

          • Tim Sullivan says:

            I don’t understand this post, JamesHalifax. Que sera sera has not demonstrated any real mental incapacity here or at other times, so what do you mean, other than making an ad hominem (which, of course, is not any kind of reasonable, intelligent argument at all, an ad hominem).

            Also, what does “for a Liberal … appearence [sic] is everything” mean? What does this mean in any meaningful, non-ad hominem way? Are we critical that politicians are concerned about their image? Their reputations? Are Liberals particularly concerned more than other politicians of other parties? Is this a thing, or just something said in retort without thinking? I like to think I’m an observer of politics, and I don’t know this to be a thing.

            I do know that Harper has tried to rebrand the government “the Harper Government”, has erected pictures of himself (and removed all others) in the government lobby of the House, and kicked out kids from his rallies, but is the Liberal politician MORESO than others concerned with appearance?

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Jason, the liberal in front of a mirror wasn’t in reference to their physical appearance…but I think you knew that.

            It was the liberals (actually, the NDP is worse, but we’re discussing LIberals here) who liked to proclaim their latest feel good projects, knowing full well it wouldn’t address the real issue…but it made them feel (sound) good.

            ie. Gun registry, kelowna, Kyoto..etc..etc….

            When the Libs get their act together….then I may consider changing back to my old party…until then, no way.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Tim, though I defend the Conservative policies I agree with, I also denounce those in which I disagree with.

            Read my other post with regards to Liberals and the mirror……I wasn’t discussing physical appearance, as much as I was discussing the “progressive” tendency to want to appear compassionate and kind in the eyes’ of others…without actually taking any concrete action to actually be compassionate and kind. Frankly, the LIbrals can no longer tell the two apart.

            For the record…here’s what I have problems with the Conservatives:
            - I believe in equal marriage. All Canadians have the inherent right to love and be with whomever they choose as long as they are both consenting adults.
            - I think we should legalize marijuana…but tax the hell out of it and have the same TV spots informing folks of the risks involved.
            – Internet laws…..I’m glad the bill to snoop on internet use has apparently died.
            – abortion – I’m pro-choice, but so are many Conservative MP’s, just as many Liberal MP’s are opposed to it.

            There are more cases….but you get my drift. I’m a fiscal conservative, socially Liberal. (a classic Liberal, not the phoney ones we see remaining in the backbenches)

            As for using the “Harper Government”…I suspect that will only last as long as Harper is popular, which is why the NDP is attacking Harper the man, not the prime minister.

          • Tim Sullivan says:

            Of course, you realize JamesHalifax, your response makes no sense is is a propos of nothing discussed to that point.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            I don’t need a reason or permission to post anything…..if you don’t want to read it…feel free.

          • que sera sera says:

            “I don’t need a reason to post anything”.

            ====================

            Obviously.

    • Robbie says:

      We are just passing out of the single biggest 5 year (2006-2011) birth cohort since the tail end of the Baby Boom (1957-1961) 50 years ago. Lots of kids under 10 in my neighbourhood.

  5. Tim Sullivan says:

    You only get this kind of answer from someone who has critical-thinking skills. If we are out with the education, we can be out with this kind of non-compliant, unpatriotic, Far Left, UnAmerican attitude.

    http://thediplomat.com/the-editor/2012/07/12/texas-to-ban-critical-thinking-skills/

    • frmr disgruntled Con now Happy Lib says:

      Your post made me think of this George Carlin rant……http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

      • smelter rat says:

        I miss George.

        • frmr disgruntled Con now Happy Lib says:

          Moi aussi……but the American people most of all, Im sure……

        • JamesHalifax says:

          I agree……George Carlin was well ahead of his time.

          I especially loved his, “You always need a place for your stuff” schtick….
          too funny.

          Oh..or the “7 words you can’t say)

          Of course, the fat dude who was a former preacher was also excellent….can’t remember his name offhand.

          • frmr disgruntled Con now Happy Lib says:

            Sam Kinison…..one of my favs also……have you ever seen/heard his version of “Are you lonesome tonight?”……hes actually got a damn fine voice…..

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Sam Kinison…that’s him.

            And yes, he had a good voice, and he could project it. All that practice preaching and collecting from little old ladies.

            I think he hated religion by the time he died…or at least the version he was forced to espouse as a youngster.

          • Kevin says:

            You’re right about G Carlin. I liked pretty much everything he did. His last appearance here at the NAC, though, one of his topics was suicide. Now, there are some things you just can’t make a comedy routine out of, and that’s definitely one of them. We gave him an ovation at the end of his show, but I’m sure that for most people, it was in appreciation for his body of work, not his choice of material that one time.

  6. JamesHalifax says:

    Hey, Warren…on another note. Do you want to give Dalton McGinty a call and tell him he can stop spending billions on windfarms no one by lizzie May and David suzuki want? If it’s hard to convince them they have been duped…show him this.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/ipcc_admits_its_past_reports_were_junk.html

    Oh..and while you’re at it….tell Kirsty Duncan that Nobel called…they want the prize back.

  7. WDM says:

    A few things I’d like to see changed in terms of how politics is covered by the media:

    1. Don’t allow the party to decide who they send for an interview. If any party, whether it be Conservative, Liberal or NDP send on someone who has a history of refusing to answer the question, tell them their services aren’t needed.

    2. Less focus on silly inside Ottawa issues. On a 2 hour show, have 6 20 minute blocks to really analyze an issue, story or piece of legislation.

    3. Do a better job of restricting the use of anonymous sources.

    4. Completely end MP panels.

    Some will say the lack of partisan sniping may decrease interest in the show, but my view is that anyone willing to sit down and watch two hours of political coverage will take the in-depth policy analysis as well.

    • Philip says:

      Right on the money. Points 3 and 4, in particular, would go a long way to improve how reporters and producers present their stories to us. You are right about the appetite out there for a serious 2 hour look at Canadian politics, I’m not sure if we will ever see it but I do live in hope.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        WDM….I have to agree. There is nothing more irritating than watching a bunch of partisan MP’s being interviewed on the CBC, and the CBC treating it as news as opposed to simple talking points they have all rehearsed. it’s pathetic.

        If Evan solomon wants an opinion…on public opinion…then he should walk the streets and ask severerly normal Canadians what they think. True, you’ll find a great many who don’t pay attention, or give silly ill-informed answers, but still, seeing how ill-informed the average Canadian is about politics is in and of itself also very informative.

    • Tim Sullivan says:

      Ottawa South MP David McGuinty has wised-up to some of these media tactics. He refuses when asked to do panels now. When he does something, he will avoid certain panelists. He sees that the media thrive on, dwell on, and require conflict.

      If you ask him, he will tell you that his constituents have commented to him more favourably about him since he’s shunned the MP panels. He sticks around the riding (not so hard being in Ottawa). He had one of the biggest pluralities of the Liberals in the last election.

      If airlines advertised like politicians, no one would fly.

  8. JamesHalifax says:

    Ottawacon….the only role the Government can play right now is funding, and working with the Chief’s. Unfortunately, the feds can’t take the time to go to the reserve and try and teach mother’s or mother’s to be that drinking, smoking, or taking drugs while pregnant is a bad idea.

    I think chretien tried to address the problem in 1968….and he was pilloried for it as being some kind of meddler, or of trying to assimilate first nations folks. The Government cannot help anyone unless they want to be helped, and simply throwing money at the problem isn’t going to do it.

    On the news last night, it was shown how an innu chief on a poor reserve paid himself $1,000,000 salary, begging the question, how does paying yourself far more than your worth…help the poor on the reserve. I’m sure most of that money would have been better spent elsewhere. Same with Attiwaspikat. The chief was doing fine as were her fellow councillers and elders….but many of her people were living in shacks.

  9. Anne Peterson says:

    Some people should get out more or read more or something. Drive through Denmark and there is a windmill at the back of every farm and lots of other places. Not technology that should be shelved just because some people are dinosaurs. If wind energy had as much financial help from the feds as the oil industry McGuinty’s ideas would be a go-ahead.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Anne…if you’re such a fan.

      Ask one to be put in your back yard.

      Just remember to clean up the dead birds each day….you don’t want to stink up the place.

      Oh….and pay six times as much for electric power than it actually costs.

      • Michael says:

        James I am wondering why the federal Conservative government is assisting the manufacturers of wind turbines?

        Surely Harper has access to the same data you do? Can’t he see all that is wrong with wind turbines?

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Michael, I have no idea why the Government is helping with wind turbines ( I wasn’t aware the Feds were very involved) but I’m sure it has to do with spreading around the largesse…..ala “Action Plan”..which I never agreed with).

          Every place Wind turbines or farms have been tried has been both a financial and real fiasco. Dalton McGinty libs are the worst offenders….

          Once government subsidies are gone…wind turbine manufacturers go belly up. We’re just stuck with the ugly view and the bill.

      • Pat says:

        Also, bird deaths from turbines are considerably lower than both cars and cats. Should we all stop driving? Should we stop having domesticated cats? How many birds are killed by pollution from coal-fired plants?

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Pat, simply because some factors already kill wildlife, is not justification for adding more.

          Frankly, the Wind turbines kill more “valuable” birds, as in hawks, eagles, and other raptors, but it also kills thousands of night flying bats, as the air pressure around the blades of the turbine is much lower when they are moving, and bats caught near that low pressure area are actually dying. (they blow up…like a deep sea diver coming up too fast).

          Just walk around the base of a wind turbine and look at the dead critters. Not a pretty sight.

          • AmandaM says:

            Yeah, that’s not actually true. Wind turbines across Ontario killed only 6 birds last year.

  10. Brian says:

    “The media who applaud this are the same media who’d attack if it ever actually happened”

    And, the same corporate media that sat back, and is still sitting back allowing it to happen. Rather than inform with factual reporting they’d prefer to print divisive drivel on their front page like the inconsequential opinions about women’s dress code from a lone Muslim street cleric in Toronto, or filling space in their tabloid with sport scores and pictures of girls in bikinis. It didn’t have to be like this.

  11. Liam says:

    That one speech is so emblematic of The Newsroom as a whole – passionate-but-preachy, rough-but-almost-endearing-but-not-quite (plus too reliant on stats and nearing uncomfortable in it’s attitudes towards women, but I digress).

    What I’m most fascinated with is tracing how Sorkin got to that speech from this one: http://t.co/lWe7dvji.

    Is he in danger of pulling a full Mamet and writing a book giving un-ironic shout-outs to Glenn Beck? I mean, he even borrows his own ‘reaching-for-the-stars’ motif, but where in WW it was something the characters genuinely believed was attainable vs. in Newsroom where it’s a sad elegy for times he clearly now sees as long past.

  12. Steve T says:

    Great commentary about the current state of things… but the nostalgia about the country that “was the greatest” just sounds like the usual romantacism of history. Many of the things that Jeff Bridges waxes nostalgic about either (a) didn’t actually happen, or (b) weren’t nearly that cut-and-dried. However, we love to summarize and selectively-quote history, as it suits us. This has led to us forgetting a number of important lessons in history. This is true for everything from the Nazis (they didn’t just spring up from a magic well of evil – they were slowly created due to conditions in Germany since WW1) to vaccination (they aren’t a sinister plot of pharmaceutical companies – they prevent horrific diseases that killed thousands of children every year) to dozens of other examples.

    So, while it is nice to critique the current state of things, it is also dangerous to long for the days of yore. In many cases, they were pretty sucky too, for other reasons.

  13. Bil H says:

    anyone find it ironic that part of this 3 1/2 minutes condemns defining yourself by who you vote for, and the first 8 of 10 commentors underneath the link basically do just that (on both sides)?

    guess this video wasn’t as powerful as i thought it was.

  14. The Doctor says:

    By the way, this assertion that Canada’s infant mortality rate has somehow disastrously gotten worse under Harper doesn’t seem to be backed up in a big way by the sources I checked out. It seems the rate did have one rise in one year, 2007-8, but has fallen in every other year:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ca&v=29

  15. The Doctor says:

    I found this discussion of Canada’s infant mortality rate (especially in a peer comparison context) from the Conference Board to be informative and refreshingly non-partisan:

    http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/health/infant-mortality-rate.aspx

    Again, room for improvement, things to feel good and bad about, but no particular evidence of some material worsening of the situation upon Harper becoming PM.

  16. que sera sera says:

    JamesHalifax July 17/12 12:30 pm: “…you can’t talk sense to a Liberal.”

    JamesHalifax busy proving it daily on warrenkinsella.com with keyboard smear jobs presented as “known facts” and sweeping unsubstantiated generalizations presented as “truth”.

    Bigot.

  17. que sera sera says:

    JamesHalifax July 17/12 12:30 pm: “…you can’t talk sense to a Liberal.”

    JamesHalifax busy spewing nonsense daily on warrenkinsella.com with keyboard smear jobs presented as “known facts” and sweeping unsubstantiated generalizations presented as “truth”.

    Bigot.

  18. que sera sera says:

    Can someone please direct me to the warrenkinsella.com website?

    I appear to have accidentally wandered into the JamesHalifax dawn-to-dusk self-referencing, infinitely looping (infinitely loopy), smear job monologue.

    • Warren says:

      James, can you cool it a bit? It’s the quality of one’s argument. Not the quantity.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Then how do you explain Que sera sera and a few others’?

        But sure….I don’t mean to keep you that busy.

        • Tim Sullivan says:

          Que sera sera is a piker compared to JamesHalifax. JamesHalifax has over 30 posts here (no count yet on how many make any rational argument).

          It gets tedious, JamesHalifax, to read shallow, unsupported commentary and then to have ad hominems used to defend said shallow, unsupported commentary.

  19. JamesHalifax says:

    Tom, I disagree on many issues with the Conservatives, but Harper has already shown he’s not going to mess with marriage, he’s not going to mess with abortion, but he’s also not going to stop MP’s from voting their conscience.

    He’s also not going to force Canada into a recession by trying to follow the ridiculous Kyoto protocol, the Kelowna accord, and he’s not going to capitulate in his stance on Israel, and many other things I agree with him on.
    Lastly, and more importantly….I don’t think Harper is the kind of politician who can be corrupted, or do I think he’s the kind of PM who would allow his MP’s to get away with trying to rip off the taxpayers. Harper won’t be calling banks and asking for favours, and he won’t be influenced by the criminal behaviour of Quebec politics.

    I don’t have to agree with everything to support the party, and as I wrote here many times before, once the Liberals get their act together (and get rid of ANY MP who was in government when the sponsorship was going down) I may be convinced to rejoin them. Until then, I’m sticking with the controlling, yet uncorruptable Harper.

    No matter what people here may feel about Harper, they need to ask themselves; Do you think Harper would use his position to enrich himself? Then ask the same of the Liberals. (of today)

    Oh…and I can’t vote for them until they get rid of sleazy folks like Dennis codderre, and dipshits like Kirsty Duncan.

  20. JamesHalifax says:

    Sorry Terenence…but you have it all backwards. You are aware, that Paul Martin simply lifted the policies from the REFORM party to get rid of the deficit correct? If not, consider yourself informed. And…who do you think wrote the REFORM policy, Terry. It was a young MP from Calgary…who just happens to be the Prime Minister today. Oh..and Harper is also the guy who wrote the Clarity Act, though he didn’t call it that, it was simpy what Stephane Dion ended up with after taking Harpers list of points and re-writing them in Liberal-ese.
    I’m glad you admit Harper isn’t corruptible, that’s why I voted for his Party. As for Vic Toews, Anders, Oda…and others’ I agree with you. If any of them had been my MP’s in the riding in which I live, they wouldn’t have gotten my vote. You can also throw in Cheryl Gallant with that pile. (can’t stand that women). If it makes you feel better Terry, I will vote Liberal if the choice is between a Liberal and the NDP. I may not be fond of today’s Liberals, but I could never withhold a vote if doing so meant the NDP were ever given charge of the public purse.

  21. JamesHalifax says:

    Yep…reply button still wonky.

  22. Tim Sullivan says:

    As for the corruptibility of Harper, no man is above that. Maybe Harper could show us who financed his leadership. It might give us some insight into his zealous promotion of the tar sands and his haste to investigate the health ramifications of wind turbines.

    Let’s see a hands-off investigation into foreigners campaigning for Conservatives and get to the bottom of the stuffed ballots in Etobicoke, the Gulf Islands voting sham, the false calls into Cotler’s riding and whatever happened in Kitchener/Waterloo, Guleph and dozens of other places regarding voter supression.

    We already know about the illicit in the In-and-Out scam.

  23. JamesHalifax says:

    Sorry Ted H….reply button is still wonky.

    As for the cut in GST, I think Harper knew full well the effect it would have. I think it was planned on several fronts.

    1. It was politically popular.
    2. Any party campaigning on raising it again will see attack ads galore.
    3. I actually agree, it does contribute to a structural deficit, but after Harper and his party finish making the cuts they have planned…it will not be structural.
    4. The reason to take a big chunk of revenue off the table was not to benefit harper….it was to hinder any future government that wanted to enact any sweeping National programs such as national childcare, Kyoto, Kelowna..etc..etc….

    Any party that campaigns on that type of platform, will have to explain to the electorate where the money will come from. The only answer of course, is raising taxes.

    Pretty good strategy if you ask me. (if we forego the (temporary) structural deficit it created)

  24. smelter rat says:

    Aboriginal children have been living on isolated reserves for the past century. Nice try though, thanks for playing.

  25. Ottawacon says:

    Ah, I see. i guess if the stat is driven by the aboriginal population, and it is not bad otherwise, we don’t need to worry about it as much?

  26. JamesHalifax says:

    smelter rat….you may not like what Ron’s writing…..

    but it happens to be true. Good thing Ron didn’t mention the incidence of fetal alcohol syndrome in the same post…you would have had a shock.

  27. JamesHalifax says:

    Ottawacon….

    It’s not up to the Government to fix the problems on reserves. It can’t do that….no matter how much money you chuck their way. Only the aboriginal folks can fix aboriginal problems….they just don’t seem to think it’s their job.

  28. JamesHalifax says:

    Tim,

    Many of these babies would have been born alive and healthy if their mothers were not taking drugs, drinking, or otherwise disregarding their own health while pregnant. There was a story a few years ago about a reserve that wanted a pregnant mother locked up until she gave birth, because she already have 3 or 4 kids who were all permanantely damaged due to her behaviour while pregnant. You don’t blame the ethnicity, you blame the society and environment that causes it.

    Blame should lay where it belongs. Mother’s or mother’s to be…who would rather stay drunk or stoned instead of taking care of their health while pregnant. This isn’t just an aboriginal issue……it’s just that as a percentage of the population, it is far more prevelant on reserves.

    Another factor is the sheer distance. Many reserves don’t have roads or doctors, so the only pre-natal care they received is after a long flight. That one we can fix…the other, is up to aboriginals.

  29. Ottawacon says:

    Sorry, I just don’t believe that the Government has no role to play. I agree that First Nations have to play the driving role, but there is a litany of bad polciy that stands in the way.

  30. Warren says:

    Observant etc was back. I’ll keep nuking the fucker as long as he keeps showing up.

  31. Kelly says:

    It doesn’t matter how far away reserves are (who’s fault is that?) the fact remains, services are inadequate and spending has to be allocated adequately to get the job done. Right now Ottawa sends more money per capita to New Brunswick than they spend per Aboriginal.

    People are living in squalor in the midst of a country where people have three car garages and 10 year olds have ensuite bathrooms. It’s uncivilized, immoral, repugnant. Everyone is connected in this country. Nobody should live like they do in Haiti. We have that in this phony conservative country. The way your side thinks and governs is the reason why it’s getting worse (and got that way in he first place — we’ve never yet had a truly progressive Scandinavian style government at the federal level. Sweden, Norway, Denmark… They don’t have poverty like we do. Period. Why would you not want what they have? The pathway there is obvious — more social spending and less private.

  32. que sera sera says:

    It is really a testament to human fortitude the painful & horrifically honest stories told by disadvantaged victimized women – of all colours, socio-economic backgrounds, and geographic locations within Canada – who have survived childhood physical & sexual abuse, abandonment, extreme poverty, rape, pregnancies, subpar housing, nutrition and health care, drug & alcohol abuse and lived to tell the tale and help educate & support not only other women in the same tragic circumstances, but also the abusers, and society at large, including governments crafting social & health policies.

    How is it that some smug, self-righteous, sanctimonious people still feel not only qualified, but entitled, to sit in judgement (anonymously of course) on these women and spout off their sweeping generalizations about something of which most of the mouthiest have absolutely zero personal knowledge. All while shilling for political parties that support socialism only for corporate and political elites while the rest of us eke out our meager existences in the dog eat dog world of corporate capitalism wearing the milk bone underwear thoughtfully provided by government.

    Reminds me of some religious fanatics in the world that still stone a woman to death for being raped, who still torture children because of the sins (real or imagined) of their parents (Omar Khadr comes to mind), and who still poison the well over autonomous independent women. Deep misogynist roots here, so ugly that they are only exposed in the context of “minority” women. With illogical obliviousness to the fact that WOMEN themselves are a minority.

    Until you walk in these women’s shoes you aren’t qualified to comment. And why is it most of the ugliest comments are along the illogical rationalizations of “I only beat her when she makes me angry?”

    “it is far more prevalent on reserves” Define “it” and provide a legitimate link supporting this problematic statement (statistically and causality) typically bandied about by unapologetic bigots and racists. And, if “you don’t blame the ethnicity”, why are many of the cheapest shots specifically referencing aboriginal women?

  33. JamesHalifax says:

    Que Sera Sera….here’s a hint.

    Residential schools have been history for a while now. True, they are a horrible stain that Harper has apologized on behalf of Canada for…however, you can not blame government for irrisponsible behaviour. It wasn’t Stephen Harper that held women down and forced booze down their throats. It wasn’t harper that made them smoke or do drugs…and it wasn’t harper who told them to have 8 kids before the age of thirty.

    Past Governments are to blame for a lot of the ills we see on reserves today, but the recent ones are not to blame. As for the physical abuse and sexual assaults on reserves..again, that’s not the Government’s doing. If the LIberals were in power, we’d still have these problems, and the First nations would still be blaming the feds.

    As for someone who is not an aboriginal or a woman having a right to make comments……of course we have the right. Not only do we want to see responsible parenting and healthy kids….we also want to be sure the taxes we pay arent’ being pissed away on booze, flat-sceen TV’s, and big honking SUV’s. The fact that most of these reserves in question have all of these things along with poverty, poor housing, and despair…shows clearly that the money isn’t getting where it is needed.

    As for the religious fanatics stoning women to death, or raping them….look at your own Liberal Senator Dellaire. He’s defending exactly the person you mention in your post…and Khadr is coming from a culture that supports everything you hate.

    As for walking in anyone’s shoes before I make any comments…sorry…..that’s not how it works. I’d never find myself in the position of buying booze before I bought baby food or diapers. I wouldn’t piss away my money on an SUV or flat screen TV if the roof over my kids head was leaking. Frankly, I’m too responsible to walk in those shoes…..but please, tell me what it’s like, as you seem to be familar with the concept.

    Que Sera sera….look how many aboriginal women have had their kids taken away because they couldn’t/wouldn’t look after their needs? The numbers are staggering, but at least these kids will have a chance if their given to a family that is at least semi-functional.

    As for the “shots” at aboriginal women…the answer is clear. It’s aboriginal women who are falling into the same patterns across Canada on these remote and isoloated reserves. Their race has nothing to do with it…there are good and bad mothers in every race, but in Canada, it’s a problem with aboriginal women. There are no “shots”…unless pointing out known facts is now considered taboo because the people in question are native.

    That’s why the problems persist….because folks like you would prefer to sit on your ass and feel good about yourself by not addressing the real problem, but instead you focus on phoney issues such as race or wealth. Find out for youself que Sera sera….try googling the stats…but be warned. They aren’ t candy coated the way your life has been….they’re real world problems.

  34. que sera sera says:

    Bigot.

    If you run real fast you might just be able to catch the short bus back to Planet Conservative.

    Get a good night’s sleep before you clock in to resume spewing your CRAP nonsense for another day in paradise.

  35. que sera sera says:

    “it is far more prevalent on reserves” Define “it” and provide a legitimate link supporting this problematic statement (statistically and causality) typically bandied about by unapologetic bigots and racists.

    The missing link…… (other than yourself) …… ? …………waiting………waiting……………

    [*crickets*]

  36. Jon Adams says:

    You know, for such a know-it-all who is SO busy at work that he has to write at light speed, you sure as shit don’t know how to use ellipses.

  37. Mike Foulds says:

    Look up Attawapiskat and the school situation and tell me again “the recent ones are not to blame.”

    No matter the political stripe we are all culpable for what we allow our government to do in our name.

  38. smelter rat says:

    The point is that his assertion that the stats have changed because of people living on reserves is bullshit. They’ve been on reserves for ages. It’s not a recent phenomena. As for your assertion that FAS is a native issue, well that bullshit too. My 35 years providing social services has taught me that much. But I suppose you know best. Also, now that Warren has unmasked Ron as “Observant”, I take nothing he said seriously.

  39. Fred from BC says:

    I am a man with a very small penis.

  40. Tim Sullivan says:

    What does one have to do to be nuked? It really messes up the “reply” feature and makes things look all wonky.

    How much bile must be spewed to be nixed from here? There is one commentator who used to be fun to read, all BS here and “you’re fat” there, but now the speed-writing inaneness of the bigotry is getting much to digest in one evening.

    Just wondering.

  41. Jon Adams says:

    Directed to JamesHalifax.

  42. smelter rat says:

    As was mine.

  43. JamesHalifax says:

    Then you need to find a girl with very small hands.

    It’ll make you look better.

  44. JamesHalifax says:

    Que Sera sera…….as predicted, you couldn’t / wouldn’t refute what I was saying, but instead decided to ignore the facts I was pointing out and take a shot. Well done…..you are indeed worthy of your “progressive” credentials.

    It’s just too bad that “feeling right” isn’t the same as doing right.

  45. JamesHalifax says:

    Que sera sera….if your definition of a bigot is someone who refutes your points using known facts (no matter how unpleasent to Liberal senses) about the issues of aboriginal women abusing substances while pregnant…..guilty as charged.

    Just because you don’t like the truth sera sera….is not an excuse to ignore the real problem simply so you can feel better about yourself.

    As for the link you were asking for, try this: Google “substance abuse statistics aboriginal Canada”…

    You get 338,000 responses.

    Pick one.

    If it makes you feel a little better, I will admit to actually sympathizing with the plight of these women, however, my sympathy to them is overshadowed by my sadness that many of them won’t give a damn if they’re pregnant or not, as long as there is a beer left in the fridge. I don’t care what caused the situation….I just want it to end. You can go on and moan about residential schools, abuse, assault, poverty and isolation…..if it makes you appear compassionate to the other posters’, however, I’d rather be seen as a bigot if it means people start addressing the problem as it stands now.
    The “Blame white man” excuse is starting to wear thin.

  46. JamesHalifax says:

    Mike…Attawapiskat would have had a school, and good housing, if instead of paying for their chiefs $150 haircut, her $85,000 SUV, and their multi-million dollar sports arena, they had spent the money on building a school that wasn’t located over a dump site.

    You know….for a reserve in such dire poverty and poor housing….you did note that many of the “band councillors” seemed to have all the niceties. I guess the 50″ flat screens, the Ford 4X4′s, the quad runners, the Arctic Cat snowmobiles and the hockey arena were all more important to the “band elders” that putting a roof over the head of some of their residents.

    Attawapiskat isn’t a money issue…..it’s a money mismangement issue. It’s about what you’d expect when you give hundreds of millions of dollars to folks who can’t even read a balance sheet.

  47. JamesHalifax says:

    Smelter rat….you were working in social services for 35 years?

    Hmm…maybe that explains the continuing problems.

    I actually know a social worker in Halifax. True, she doesn’t deal exclusively with natives, but she did tell me about one woman who had 7 kids (and she wasn’t yet 30) who wanted to put two of them up for adoption…..because her social assistance cheque did not increase after 5 kids.

    apparently paying for the other two kids was just a wasted investment.

  48. Tom says:

    “For the record…here’s what I have problems with the Conservatives:
    - I believe in equal marriage. All Canadians have the inherent right to love and be with whomever they choose as long as they are both consenting adults.
    - I think we should legalize marijuana…but tax the hell out of it and have the same TV spots informing folks of the risks involved.
    – Internet laws…..I’m glad the bill to snoop on internet use has apparently died.
    – abortion – I’m pro-choice, but so are many Conservative MP’s, just as many Liberal MP’s are opposed to it.

    There are more cases….but you get my drift. I’m a fiscal conservative, socially Liberal. (a classic Liberal, not the phoney ones we see remaining in the backbenches)”

    James, if you disagree with the CONS on so many issues, why do you vote for them? Please don’t say fiscal responsibility. The F35 is enough evidence that is not true.

  49. JamesHalifax says:

    Tom, I disagree on many issues with the Conservatives, but Harper has already shown he’s not going to mess with marriage, he’s not going to mess with abortion, but he’s also not going to stop MP’s from voting their conscience.

    He’s also not going to force Canada into a recession by trying to follow the ridiculous Kyoto protocol, the Kelowna accord, and he’s not going to capitulate in his stance on Israel, and many other things I agree with him on.
    Lastly, and more importantly….I don’t think Harper is the kind of politician who can be corrupted, or do I think he’s the kind of PM who would allow his MP’s to get away with trying to rip off the taxpayers. Harper won’t be calling banks and asking for favours, and he won’t be influenced by the criminal behaviour of Quebec politics.

    I don’t have to agree with everything to support the party, and as I wrote here many times before, once the Liberals get their act together (and get rid of ANY MP who was in government when the sponsorship was going down) I may be convinced to rejoin them. Until then, I’m sticking with the controlling, yet uncorruptable Harper.

    No matter what people here may feel about Harper, they need to ask themselves; Do you think Harper would use his position to enrich himself? Then ask the same of the Liberals. (of today)

    Oh…and I can’t vote for them until they get rid of sleazy folks like Dennis codderre, and dipshits like Kirsty Duncan.

    (sorry Warren, I”m having some “reply” issues again)

  50. Tom says:

    It’s time to give the NDP a chance.

    The sponsorship scandal pales in comparison to cost of the helicopter, F35 and submarine scandals.

    Mackay using the military as his limo service, Clementi wasting our tax dollars for his riding during G20. Harper ignoring our chater rights time and again. G8 is prime example.

    Dean Del Mastro so obviously broke the law, yet is still in cabinet. Sadly, his riding still loves the guy.

    Bev Oda on so many issues.

    Just because he won’t touch marriage and abortion now does not mean we forgive him for making those wedge issues for far to many years than necessary, nor that he won’t use them again.

    You and I seem to agree on many basic things, but vote so differently.

  51. JamesHalifax says:

    Sorry Terenence…but you have it all backwards. You are aware, that Paul Martin simply lifted the policies from the REFORM party to get rid of the deficit correct? If not, consider yourself informed. And…who do you think wrote the REFORM policy, Terry. It was a young MP from Calgary…who just happens to be the Prime Minister today. Oh..and Harper is also the guy who wrote the Clarity Act, though he didn’t call it that, it was simpy what Stephane Dion ended up with after taking Harpers list of points and re-writing them in Liberal-ese.
    I’m glad you admit Harper isn’t corruptible, that’s why I voted for his Party. As for Vic Toews, Anders, Oda…and others’ I agree with you. If any of them had been my MP’s in the riding in which I live, they wouldn’t have gotten my vote. You can also throw in Cheryl Gallant with that pile. (can’t stand that women). If it makes you feel better Terry, I will vote Liberal if the choice is between a Liberal and the NDP. I may not be fond of today’s Liberals, but I could never withhold a vote if doing so meant the NDP were ever given charge of the public purse.

    (again, sorry for the double post Warren, but the reply button is being wonky)

  52. JamesHalifax says:

    Tom, as a person who works in the field of finance and economics, I could not in good conscience ever vote the the NDP. I know what kind of damage they can do.

    Here are the options as I see them:

    Vote Liberal: Knowing you may be electing a large contingent of folks who will do or say anything just to get into power and a position of influence where one can enrich oneself. Voting Liberal knowing that some (like McGinty) will throw hundreds of millions of dollars to the wind if it means winning even one riding. Vote Liberal knowing that some folks will use their position to steal millions of dollars, or direct those amounts their way.

    Vote NDP….knowing they will most likely not steal millions of dollars, as they are true believers….but will instead cost the economy BILLIONS of dollars in flawed economic ideology.

    Sorry…..given the choices, right now my list is as follows:

    Vote Conservative – hold nose on occassion or avert eyes when a socially conservative MP gets a microphone in front of him/her.
    Vote Liberal – holding nose and voting Liberal because I would rather has a small group of corrupt Liberals (from Quebec of course) steal millions from us, than have the NDP waste 10′s of billions.
    vote NDP – sorry…..I’m staying home.

  53. JamesHalifax says:

    Terry….you clearly don’t know much about history. If by “Reading up” on how Martin fixed the economy…you’re reading a book written by Martin himself….you should try something else. Martin lifted the Reform policy to fix the economy, because that was the best course of action. I do give credit to Chretien and Martin for actually having the balls to do it when in Government, as opposed to just writing about it in opposition. As for Mulroney, again…you’re too late. Mulroney was trying to fix the mess left by Trudeau…and the GST and Free trade were the only things available to do it. Check the National Debt (not deficit) when Trudeau took over….and compare it to when he left. That is trudeaus real legacy.

    As for the USA….well, given they are our biggest customer, I would hope any Canadian Prime Minister would be following them closely. Of course, you do realize Harper has been trying to expand trade with Asia and South American so we are not as dependent. That’s a good start, and one I think the Liberals will emulate when they get back in. (Minus Coderre of course). The NDP…..they’ll just balls it up.

  54. Tom says:

    Sweden is doing great. Germany is going well. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. Meaning switching from Tory to Grit back and forth. Although I do very much support Nathan Cullen’s idea of running the best progressive (Lib or NDP) in each riding. No more left vote splitting.

  55. Tom says:

    Why should a corporate entity pay only 15% in income taxes while I pay 26%? I really need a good answer and not some “job creators” line. It’s has already been proven the corporations do not spread the wealth they have obtained by these disasterous tax cuts. It’s why the top 1% keep getting richer to the point there is a higher concentration of wealth at the top now than before the great depression. Our modern day robber barons are the fault of conservative (and some Liberal) deregulation and corporate welfare. We need a better way of doing things.

  56. Tim Sullivan says:

    JamesHalifax, was the Reform plan, “lifted” by Martin from Harper, to spend less and increase revenues?

    Why doesn’t Harper apply that principle now to the debt and deficit he’s created? Maybe Harper should “lift” his own plan and give it to the finance minister (who, BTW, could not balance a budget in Ontario either).

  57. Ted H says:

    James, Conservatives certainly are not exempt from saying things just to get into power and benefiting from the opportunities for self enrichment. Do you really think they have some kind of moral superiority? They also cost the economy plenty because of their flawed economic ideology. Every “real” economist has said that cutting the GST started the slide towards a structural deficit and while being politically smart it was economically dumb. Many of the NDP provincial governments have far superior economic records than Conservatives. The Liberal, Con, NDP sterotypes you hold up to Tom are just that, sterotypes. Liberals are not perfect, no disagreement there, but Conservatives can be downright destructive in power. The current state of US affairs “No longer the greatest country in the world” is largely due to decades of right wing economic policy. To mirror somewhat your words, I could not in good conscience ever vote Conservative, having seen over and over again the kind of damage they can do.

  58. JamesHalifax says:

    I actually partially agree with you Tim. I think the “Economic Action Plan” was only a stop-gap measure, as the real way to produce wealth and prosperity is through the private sector. I think the Keynesian approach was flawed, but I’m sure Harper was aware of it before he caved in a minority Parliament.

    He had to hold his nose……..but at least he has a majority now and cannot be blackmailed.

  59. JamesHalifax says:

    Ted H……as I wrote earlier, I don’t have to agree with Everything the Conservatives are doing. Regardless of what some may think, I do not have an alter to worship the Conservative Party of Canada.

    I just pick the best of the lot currently on offer.

    Sometimes, you have to pick the “least offensive” and hope for the best.

  60. JamesHalifax says:

    Sorry Ted H….reply button is still wonky.

    As for the cut in GST, I think Harper knew full well the effect it would have. I think it was planned on several fronts.

    1. It was politically popular.
    2. Any party campaigning on raising it again will see attack ads galore.
    3. I actually agree, it does contribute to a structural deficit, but after Harper and his party finish making the cuts they have planned…it will not be structural.
    4. The reason to take a big chunk of revenue off the table was not to benefit harper….it was to hinder any future government that wanted to enact any sweeping National programs such as national childcare, Kyoto, Kelowna..etc..etc….

    Any party that campaigns on that type of platform, will have to explain to the electorate where the money will come from. The only answer of course, is raising taxes.

    Pretty good strategy if you ask me. (if we forego the (temporary) structural deficit it created)

    Warren…something is seriously amiss with the Reply function. Posts are flying everywhere.

  61. Tim Sullivan says:

    The PBO says it is structural, mostly because the Cons have not factored in the cost to the treasury of the increased aging population.

    We’ll see if it is structural or not, but when you cut taxes, as Harper did, and increase spending, as Harper did, even before the 2008 “good buying” opportunity, it is difficult to see how it is not structural. However, I have to give Jim Flaherty some benefit of the doubt when he says the PBO is incorrect. The PBO has not yet been when compared to the Dept of Fin, but Flaherty’s due, his competence and acumen notwithstanding.

  62. JamesHalifax says:

    Tom,

    Corporations go where the most benefit can be found. By having a lower tax rate for business, we are likely to attract businesses that would have gone elsewhere. You cannot ignore the fact that this will result in jobs in most cases. Secondly, successful businesses issue stock to raise large amounts of capital to expand and grow their businesses, and this creates even more jobs…but it does something else too. It allows folks who have invested in RRSP’s to see a return on their money. As you are aware, many older retired Canadians on a fixed income rely on these returns to supplement their income.

    Tom, I know you support the NDP, however, until the NDP can learn to connect the dots between the private sector and the economy, they are not worthy of running the country. The Liberals and the Conservatives both have MP’s and members who have an understanding of business and the economy….that’s one of the reasons it is only they that have been elected in the past.

    I’m sure the NDP will get their shot one day……but you had better hope you have some wealth accumlated by then, as it certainly won’t accumulate under an NDP Government and their Socialistic ways. The Socialist model has NEVER worked as efficiently as some seem to believe.

  63. JamesHalifax says:

    Tim, The PBO has been wrong on many occassions, but I think he is correct about the structural deficit if you consider the short term. I also think Harper is fully aware of the GST cut and the aging population. That’s why he’s made the changes to the OAS. I suspect that Harper will make even more, and bigger cuts to get rid of the structural deficit, but I think his main plan is to grow the economy so that the structural deficit no longer exists. You get rid of deficits by cutting spending, or increasing revenue. Harper, as can plainly be seen is trying to do both. We just won’t see the results for a while.

    As Canadians, we should forget about whether you like the PM as a man or not, and just consider what he is trying to do. If he’s succesful, we’ll all be better off in the end, and we’ll have enough revenue to maintain our social safety net.

  64. smelter rat says:

    Go fuck yourself James. Seriously . You’re a waste of skin.

  65. Tom says:

    James,
    I disagree. If cutting Corp taxes grows employment then Canada and especially the US should be overwhelmed with jobs. The fact is Corporations are not using the money saved in these taxes to invest in Canada. They are hoarding it or investing it overseas. It’s why India and Brazil are booming with foreign investment.

    I am more NDP but also support Liberals too.

    We already have socialism here in Canada. The Conservatives already spend most of our money on the epitome of Socialism, which is the military, and their economics on spending for it are awful.

  66. Tim Sullivan says:

    Curious, JamesHalifax. When has the PBO been wrong when the Dept of Fin has been accurate?

    Also, are you suggesting that Harper is reducing the social safety net to save it? When the PBO says the OAS is secure and that it need not be cut, while the Dept of Finance will not say what numbers it has to justify a reduction in the OAS age, is the PBO again wrong?

    There was no structural deficit when the CPC took power in 2006, so what has changed, other than mismanagement of the public finances?

  67. Tom says:

    James,

    Harper is cutting spending on social safety nets and transferring the costs to his pet projects, Prisons and wasteful military spending. Have the Conservatives ever balanced a budget?

Leave a Reply

*