Here.

Comments (22)

Just named me, and a personal relationship, in the Leg.  I dare him to repeat it when he isn’t protected from a libel lawsuit.  I dare him.

(And if he repeats it on a web site, or elsewhere, please let me know.)

UPDATE: He wouldn’t repeat it outside the legislature. Chickenshit.
 

Comments (3)

Wildrose not as scary as some say
The Daily News (Kamloops)
Fri Apr 20 2012
Page: C1
Section: Opinion
Source: Vancouver Province 

It is intriguing to hear the gathering chorus of alarmed bleating as Wildrose leader Danielle Smith grows closer to taking power in Alberta, with her libertarian views and her band of small-business managers, oilpatch professionals, real-estate agents and municipal councillors.

Recent stories have noted, eyebrows raised, that Smith advocates a more robust role for Alberta within Confederation, in keeping with its economic clout. She thinks that, horrors, Alberta should explore having its own police force, as Ontario and Quebec do. She’s a proponent of “firewall” politics, a reference to the famous letter of 2001, signed by a group of prominent Alberta conservatives, including Stephen Harper.

At the same time, in response to politically incorrect remarks by Wildrose candidates, we’ve seen the now-customary reactions.

“If elected, she will unleash social and political chaos unlike anything Alberta has seen since the bad old days of Social Credit,” wrote Warren Kinsella, summing up the Liberal view nicely.

But history, logic and evidence suggest the opposite. Wildrose will stumble, but it will be by what afflicts every new government populated by inexperienced idealists: awkward compromise and simple incompetence.

This is the real risk in a Wildrose victory: Smith and her band of rebels are green as grass. The party has four members of the legislature. Combined with policies of internal free speech, recall rights and referendums, this can become a mess if mishandled, as it did for Reform 20 years ago.

But Smith is an avowed progressive and it is not credible to suggest that anti-abortion, anti-gay Visigoths are at the gate. The clatter about Wildrose’s ascent is nothing more than, oddly, conservatism — fear of the new.

Judging from the polls, Albertans are not inclined to buy it.

— Vancouver Province

Comments (1)

I’m one.  So is the United Church and the Salvation Army.  So are plenty of folks.

What brings the word “lobbying” into disrepute is crap like this.  And, no, I’m not at all surprised to see who is at the centre of it.  As you may recall, I was prepared to swear an affidavit (as was my friend Mraz) to make clear whom was telling the truth in the Lib-Dipper merger melodrama, a couple years back.  I’m not a fan.

Setting up a meeting is a registrable act.  So too is attempting to persuade a public office holder to do something, or not do something.  The fact that one did not docket one’s time for lobbying does not also mean that one was not otherwise compensated for lobbying.  “Any amount” of lobbying, says the Conservative expert at the law firm in question, should be registered.  I agree with that.

Anyway.  What goes ’round comes ’round, as a former big shot is about to learn the hard way.

Comments (2)

In this extraordinary case, in less than three minutes. Don’t be surprised if this affects you emotionally.

Comments (12)

From reliable source(s), an exchange that took place between [TOP SECRET NAME REDACTED] and Ken Zeise, who was until recently the PC Party President, at the Mississauga South Ontario PC AGM:

Zeise told me tonight that Warren’s vocal support for Alison Redford and the Alberta PCs is really pissing off Ontario PC party brass. He said – and I’m quoting here – that “it’s driving them batty, and I’m sure Warren would just love to hear that.”

I confess: I indeed love it when I cause Tim Hudak’s gang acute pain.  I am vengeful and petty, and I cannot help myself. Oh, and by the by: Tea Party Tim’s gang is no longer led by Mark, and is now led by Tom and Leslie. I like Leslie and Tom, but war is war. They’ll be groaning for burial, in the words of the Bard, soon enough.

Comments (24)

Campaigns matter. Stephen Carter, the election strategist who took Naheed Nenshi from nowhere to capture Calgary’s mayoralty, is the same guy who engineered Redford’s huge win on Monday night.

Carter is self-effacing and brilliant – and he showed, convincingly, that a well-run campaign can make all the difference on election night.
Redford and Carter undersold and overperformed. They were disciplined.

But, most of all, they understood modern Alberta better than their main opponent. While Smith had candidates saying gays would burn in hellfire, and white candidates were better than non-white ones, the Alberta PCs stuck to the middle of the road – which is where all the votes are.

They showed everyone that centrist, progressive politics ain’t dead. Not in Alberta, and not in Canada.

Comments (22)

For the past while, I’ve been pretty open about my enthusiasm for Alison Redford.  I’ve also been pretty critical of her main opponent, Wildrose’s Danielle Smith.  I haven’t hidden it.

As such, I’ve gotten a few tweets sent my way, some of which I would like to share for your amusement.  I wanted to put them on this web site before they end up down the memory hole, like quite a few pundits’ prognostications.

Here’s a sampling from your garden variety Wildrose supporters.

 

Those were fun.  Now, I also heard from some well-known people.  Here’s what three conservative pundits (whom I like a great deal) told me when I suggested that Danielle Smith would pay a price for not condemning extremists in her midst:

 

Those were fun, too.  I also heard from pollsters, however.  Here’s what some of them had to say about my suggestion (in a column) that Smith would pay a price and (in a posting) that Redford would win:

 

“Pay attention”! Ha! I like that. Best of all, however, was National Post reporter Jen Gerson.  She was assigned to cover the Alberta election. I had thought Jen was pretty smart, but I’m not so sure about that anymore.  For instance, I suggested on Facebook, Twitter and on this web site, that Wildrose extremism – like the lunatic who called for David Suzuki to be assassinated – was newsworthy, and would hurt Wildrose.  Jen disagreed.  Jen, who knows better, had this to say:

 

Get that? “Actual stories.”  Like, saying gays will burn in Hell, or saying that whites are better, or calling for political adversaries to be murdered aren’t, you know, such a big deal.  But I’m a bit slow, so I pressed Jen on the issue.  I disagreed with her; I expressed puzzlement with her disinterest.  This is what she came back with:

 

Isn’t that nice? What a nice person.

Anyway, you get the point, I suspect.  Last night wasn’t just a big political deal. It was a big deal for four “Ps” – partisans, pundits, pollsters and press people.

Most of them were wrong, wrong, wrong. In politics, as in life, you should always ask this question: “What if I’m wrong?” I certainly am, often. In the past few days, however, so were quite a few other people.  And, thanks to the wonder that is Twitter, the proof is there for us all to behold.

Have a good one, tweeters!

Comments (70)

Sarah Palin North got beaten, badly.  The PC leader who impressed me so much, months ago, won big.  Quick takes:

• Rod Love has gone into hiding.
• A hole has been kicked in a wall at 24 Sussex.
• That viral vid urging youth to vote PC wasn’t so bad after all, eh?
• I guess gays won’t burn in Hell after all – and white candidates aren’t always better than non-white ones!
• My family weren’t the only Alberta Grits urging people to vote for Redford, looks like.
• Never, ever underestimate Stephen Carter.  Redford and Nenshi don’t.
• Tom Flanagan has now lived through Week Four Bozone Layer eruptions twice.  Ouch.
• Gord Tulk, kiss my ass!

Much to say about all this in the days ahead.  But the pundits and the pollsters don’t look terribly good, tonight!

Comments (57)

But that’s just politics. When Canadians are probed about their attitudes and identities — the deep-down, emotional stuff that doesn’t easily lend itself to words, but which drives political choices — conservatives increasingly dominate.

Following the lead of U.S. conservatives in the 1960s, the Canadian right has become far better at communicating (thus its near-total dominance of editorial voices), and it has become much better at promoting conservative values (thus its ability to convince average folks to vote against their economic interests).

Canadian conservatives don’t run everything — yet. But like their U.S. counterparts, Canadian right-wingers have methodically sought to dominate at the level of words and values. They know that if they can capture voters’ hearts and minds, winning elections will be a piece of cake.

What matters most isn’t party affiliation. What matters is an emotional connection — and, right now, it’s conservatives who’ve got it.

Not progressives.

Comments (8)