What's the deal, Leah?

Ok. I would like everyone to notice YESTERDAY'S posting. In it, I lambasted Stephen Harper for his poor sense of style and lack of social grace.

Now, I want you to check out Leah McLaren's article in TODAY's Globe and Mail (click here).

So, either Leah and I have some sort of psychic connection, or someone (ie LEAH) is pillaging from my blog!!!!

Why the f@!# is Harper wearing a flak jacket?!

This isn't Kandahar- it's Cancun, for Christ's sake! So why is our dorky Prime Minister dressed like he's in a war zone? What possible need does he have for a vest with so many pockets? Is he going fishing after this? Is he being sponsored by Tilley? Did he think they were going on an archeological dig? Doesn't he have anyone on staff in charge of trying to make him seem remotely cool?

Look at George and Vicente in their casual white linens- they seem so relaxed and at ease with each other. Then there's Stephen...prematurely going in for the handshake before his turn. He's like that dorky kid from summer camp who shows up a week late with way too much gear and not many social skills.

I know it's petty to make fun of the Prime Minister's poor sense of style and lack of social grace, but I'm pressed for time and he's an easy target. By the looks of it I think we could both use a Piña Colada.

Ontario Budget provides funds for every Ontarian to move to Alberta

Well people, I'm totally swamped with work right now, but I couldn't let something as momentous and exciting as the release of the Ontario budget happen without my commentary.

As many of you know, the Alberta budget was released a couple of days ago. According to Finance Minister McClellan, the new funding strategy will be to provide every Albertan over the age of 3 one million dollars and a set of 24- karat gold steak knives.

Here in Ontario, we're getting a subway to York University. A fucking desolate place that people don't go to unless they absolutely have to.

How'dya like them apples?

Canadian wins popularity contest in Middle East


On the cover of today’s Globe and Mail, the headline, “We Love Canada” is perched over a very large picture of Mark Budzanowski. Budzanowski is the Canadian aid worker who was kidnapped and subsequently released yesterday in Gaza. The kidnappers were members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), acting in angry retaliation against the invasion of a Jericho jail by Israeli forces (The new Hamas-lead Palestinian government had threatened to set free several Palestinians who were responsible for the death of an Israeli MK last year, and Israel said "no way"). The PFLP blames the Americans and British for allowing Israel to complete the invasion.

Anyways, when the kidnappers realized that the dude they nabbed was a Canuck, apparently they were more than happy to let him go. Hence the extremely self-congratulatory article in today’s paper.

I must admit, at first I thought nothing of it. I skimmed through the article and felt a fleeting sense of smugness- the same sense of superiority I feel when Canada wins hockey gold at the Olympics, or when we’re not mentioned in scary Bin Laden tapes shown on al-Jazeera.

But then I got a call from a friend who read the article and was pissed. She “took exception” to the fact that the emphasis of the article was Canada’s good name, as opposed to the violence of kidnapping as a means of resistance. I listened to her argument, and despite my fondness for disagreeing with this particular friend, I thought she made a good point.

And it got me thinking…how many other Canadians (like me) read this article and responded to is as if they had just been told by an American that Canada makes a better beer? Because that’s really what this article is about. The story being told in the Globe today is not about the ridiculous and terrifying (not to mention increasingly popular) tactic of attacking innocent aid workers; it’s a smug and narrow-minded piece that celebrates the fact that the kidnappers think we’re cool.

Scary Stephen's downward spiral

In the policy section of the Conservative’s website, there is a section entitled “Strengthen the role of the Ethics Commissioner”. According to this plan, Steven Harper will, among other things, "Give the Ethics Commissioner the power to fine violators; Prevent the Prime Minister from overruling the Ethics Commissioner on whether the Prime Minister, a minister, or an official is in violation of the Conflict of Interest Code; Enshrine the Conflict of Interest Code into law.” (http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2275/28982).

These bold statements formed much of the basis of Harper’s campaign. Now, for those of you who are not aware, responding to NDP and Liberal complaints, Bernard Shapiro (Canada’s Ethics Commissioner) announced last week that he would be conducting an investigation into the appointment of former Liberal MP David Emerson as Conservative Industry Minister (see blog entry for Tuesday Feb. 7th). The quick and dirty version of this story goes like this: Despite actively campaigning as a Liberal against scary Steven and his cartel of Conservatives, Emerson crossed the floor to accept the Conservative cabinet appointment (Much to the dismay of his constituents, campaign staff, and many Canadians).

So here’s where it gets REALLY juicy. What does scary Stephen do when he hears of the impending investigation? He does what any crooked politician would do- he tells Bernie to mind his own beeswax! Not only does he publicly announce that he will not cooperate with the investigation; he calls up Ed Broadbent and offers him Bernie’s job! According to Harper’s Director of Communications, Sir Stephen “is loathe to cooperate” with a “Liberal appointee”. Which is total bunk, by the way. According to Bill C-4 (the Act that introduced the creation of Office of the Ethics Commissioner), the Commissioner is appointed only after approval by a resolution of the House of Commons (http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/3/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-4/C-4_4/90225bE.html#3).

Bottom line is that our Prime Minister has violated campaign promises and is attempting to prevent the Ethics Commissioner from ascertaining whether or not a conflict of interest has occurred. So, what are we to make of this blatant act of hypocrisy? That’s where you, the readers, come in. I will now put forth a list of possible reasons for scary Stephen’s big fuck-you to the Ethics Commissioner, and you get to choose the one you think is right! Click on the “comment” button at the bottom of the message to inform us of your selection, or submit your own!

Stephen Harper is blatantly acting like a hypocritical jackass because:

a) He’s drunk with power.
b) He thinks the “bad-boy” image of being a callous liar is hot.
c) He’s suffering from amnesia and has no memory of his campaign promises.
d) He’s hoping to get fired so he can run away and join the rodeo.
e) He doesn’t give a shit what the Canadian public thinks.
f) None of the above (if you select this answer, you must write in with an option of your own!)

Looking forward to your responses!

Afghanistan blindspot: take 2

It’s been a nasty couple of weeks for Canadian troops in Afghanistan. A road accident, suicide attack, and most recently, a soldier killed by an axe-wielding teenager have caused the Canadian media to ask if Canada needs to re-assess its role in Afghanistan. What I want to know is when did Canada assess this issue in the first place?

In today’s Globe and Mail, Norman Spector argues that the lack of debate about Canada’s role in Afghanistan is to be blamed on the fact that the decision was made without the approval of Parliament.

Great point Norm, but where the f*@# were you 2 months ago when all we were hearing about was daycare-this and GST-that?!

Anna Maria Tremonte and the fine folks at CBC’s The Current dedicated today’s episode to the “question” of Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Well done, but talk about closing the stable doors after the horses have fled. Don’t get me wrong- I’m glad that after a couple shitty weeks at war all our pundits have their shorts in a knot. But why didn’t any of you smart-asses bring this up DURING THE ELECTION?

And here’s where I get to say “I told you so”. Please scroll down the page to the posting from Jan. 17th titled "The Afghanistan Election Blindspot", and notice how I bitched and moaned about the fact that the deployment of 2300 troops to Afghanistan during an election didn’t constitute an election issue. But now the election has come and gone, scary Steven and his cartel of conservatives have us in their clutches, and there’s not much we can do about it, now is there?

* I have been advised by my lawyer/husband to inform my readers that Chief of Defence Staff Hillier did not actually make this statement. Please be advised that this is NOT a quote by Hillier, but rather an example of my unique blend of witty satire and technological savvy.