Wednesday 21 May 2014

New holes in Justin Trudeau’s abortion declaration

By Kelly McParland - from the National Post (May 21, 2014)

Not for the first time, Liberal spin-doctors are out with little nets, rounding up words spoken by party leader Justin Trudeau and re-organizing them into something more suitable for public consumption.
This time it’s about abortion. When Mr. Trudeau declared recently that all future Liberals would be required to support abortion, he didn’t mean what he appeared to say. According to the Liberal clean-up crew, Mr. Trudeau merely intended to note that a 2012 policy convention affirmed “Women’s Right to Reproductive Health Services,” and, in future, Members of Parliament would be expected to reflect that fact in abortion-related votes.
We’re told he did not mean to suggest there was a ban on Liberals voicing opposition in caucus, or on raising troubling aspects of the position, such as the fact Canadians overwhelmingly oppose sex-selection abortion. According to Maryanne Kampouris, Liberal policy chair, “All Canadians, including Liberal Members of Parliament and candidates, are free to express their deeply held beliefs, and, more specifically the Liberal Party of Canada does not discriminate against current or potential candidates because of these beliefs.”
Anyone who thinks Mr. Trudeau said something else must need to get their ears cleaned. Or perhaps they fell victim to unspecified “misrepresentation” of Mr. Trudeau’s words. “The record should be set straight,” says Ms. Kampouris.
Okay, so here are Mr. Trudeau’s words, exactly as he spoke them: “For current members, we will not eject someone from the party for beliefs they have long held,” Trudeau said. “But the Liberal party is a pro-choice party, and going forward, all new members and new candidates are pro-choice.”

Monday 19 May 2014

George Jonas: Canada, a police state? No, but heading that way | National Post

-from the National Post By George Jonas (May 17, 2014)


A society drifting into a police state displays some early warning signs. They’re not too subtle and I very much doubt if they  require previous exposure to tyranny to detect.
Ironically, one is a demand for more freedom and democracy, along with a wider distribution of political power and human rights.
In the jungle screeching birds and chattering monkeys trace the route of a predator on the prowl. In our neck of the woods, scholarly and media voices perform the same function. It begins by academic thinkers discovering rights and freedoms nobody knew existed, or rather everybody knew they existed, but not that they were rights and freedoms. They were viewed as legitimate ambitions at best, and at worst as sins and vices, or even crimes. Still, now that they’re known to be rights and freedoms, i.e. constitutional values in a democracy, they have to be given their due.
All right, so go ahead and implement them, you might say — but here’s the rub: Often such newly minted rights and freedoms run headlong into freedoms and rights established much earlier and regarded as fundamental. They include freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and so on. They remain on the books as freedoms, but their exercise in a direction not approved by the state now becomes known variously as sexism, racism, homophobia and Islamophobia, along with other phobias and isms that have been reduced from philistine norms to hidebound, antediluvian discriminatory practices, very likely human rights violations, possibly criminal offences, and arguably psychiatric conditions, at least in some cases.
'via Blog this'

Saturday 3 March 2012

If Stockton Is Broke, Why Isn’t San Diego? - Bloomberg

By Stephen Greenhut - from Bloomberg (March 1, 2012)


Stockton, California, which is heading toward the first steps of Chapter 9 bankruptcy, is described as a crime-racked wretch designated by Forbes magazine as the most miserable city in America.
But it would be wrong to believe that the troubles in the city of almost 300,000 residents in the agricultural San Joaquin Valley are not necessarily a sign of things to come in more upscale municipalities across the state.
Unfortunately, the financial mess in Stockton echoes problems throughout California, even though public-sector union leaders and Democratic state legislators are in denial about this reality. In cities as affluent and diverse as San Jose and San Diego, municipal finances are hitting the wall, driven by unsustainable pension debt and health-care promises made to government workers during more flush economic times.
Stockton has not been a prime location since the Gold Rush, but only a few years ago it was a reasonable destination for commuters who couldn’t swing the prices in San Francisco, about 80 miles west. Now the murder rate is at record highs, and the police union is in a pitched battle with the new city manager. The debt-laden downtown redevelopment area looks like a ghost town, and the city is littered with foreclosed properties.
Stockton is also in the news as the test case for a new state law intended to put the brakes on municipal bankruptcy. It’s a reminder not just of how far and fast a city can fall, but also of problems that are festering everywhere.

‘Ponzi Scheme’

“There was no money set aside to fund those commitments,” Stockton City Manager Bob Deistold Capital Public Radio in reference to $760 million in city debt and unfunded liabilities. “While that was a legal decision they made over 20 years, it was an unsound decision and it has similarities to a Ponzi scheme.”
Blaming past councils, Deis pointed to a health-care plan that pays the entire cost of care for every city employee and spouse for life, after only one month on the job. “In my 32 years of managing finances for various local governments, I have never heard of a situation like this,” he added.
As Bloomberg News reported, the city “granted employees some of the state’s most generous benefits, and now has 94 retirees with pensions of at least $100,000 a year -- more than twice as many as some comparably sized California cities.”
Statewide there are more than 15,000 California government retirees who are members of the $100,000 pension club.
The Stockton police union, which had previously paid for ominous-looking billboards welcoming people to the second most dangerous city in California, is sure there’s some secret fund of money somewhere. Like most California unions, it refuses to recognize the state of affairs driven by the pension and health-care benefit upgrades they succeeded in attaining, mostly in the past decade. Instead of working toward reform, California’s unions and their political allies are trying to stop every possible relief valve short of huge tax increases.
For instance, the new state law requires a 90-day mediation period before bankruptcy can be declared, a watered- down version of a union-backed bill that would have required approval by a committee before cities could proceed with abrogating their debt loads. Previously cities, such as the similarly crime-plagued Vallejo on the northeastern edge of the San Francisco Bay Area, could declare bankruptcy on their own. Vallejo recently emerged from bankruptcy without seriously reworking its pension plans, however, which is a reminder to bankruptcy advocates that it can be helpful but won’t solve everything.
The state’s pro-union forces aren’t content slowing the bankruptcy process. They are committed to halting any serious reforms that would keep cities from reaching that last-ditch process. Read more...
'via Blog this'

Sunday 2 October 2011

Lies, Damn Lies, and Quotations...

Apparently my my Saturday “Sand in the Shorts” column has gotten the attention of the Liberals and NDP. First, the Liberals included a quote from “Hudak Makes the Grade (Barely)" in this press release:

Priority List Faces Horwath's Growing Credibility Gap

Horwath Having Trouble Keeping Her Stories Straight
TORONTOOct. 1, 2011 /CNW/ - Andrea Horwath is presenting her so-called priorities list while facing a growing credibility gap.
"[She claimed] that her son went to Hamilton General Hospital with a broken arm and didn't get treated.  Horwath was forced to back away from that claim... It was wrong of Horwath to push the envelope in such a way. In fact, it was dumb of her [to] exaggerate about something that could easily be checked. The number one rule of politics is don't lie — because you'll surely get found out. And yes, it speaks to character that she told a big one."
Christina BlizzardToronto Sun, October 1, 2011
"[Horwath] has struggled with facts and figures ... During a visit this week to The Globe and Mail's editorial board, Ms. Horwath confused details of her platform, including implying that a cap on the salaries of public-sector executives would save $20-million, and an acknowledgment that she wasn't sure to what the figure referred."
Adam Radwanski, Globe & Mail, October 1, 2011
"Tim Hudak's Progressive Conservatives and Andrea Horwath's New Democrats... neither has put forward credible plans."
Toronto Star Editorial, October 1, 2011
"Horwath was asked whether there was a financial connection between Cornerstone, a company that owns a building on Richmond St. E. where the NDP leases offices for its headquarters, and the NDP campaign. At first, she said Cornerstone had, 'no role whatsoever,' ...In fact, Cornerstone put up $4.3 million collateral for a loan used to finance the NDP campaign."
Christina BlizzardToronto Sun, October 1, 2011
"Andrea Horwath, leader of the NDP, demonstrating her complete unreadiness for the job of premier at every turn, by responding to every concern with another goofy promise."
- James Phieffer, Belleville Intelligencer, October 1, 2011
"Her mantra seems to by 'why let the truth get in the way of a good political rant.'  Well, thank you Andrea for providing the Ontario campaign with its first Sarah Palin moment."
Bill Kelly, CHML Radio, September 29, 2011
Later, the NDP retaliated with this release, quoting other parts of the same articles and statements:
FACT CHECK: Liberals adrift with selective quoting

TORONTOOct. 1, 2011 /CNW/ - The Ontario Liberals put out a press release today featuring quotes from comment pieces about Andrea Horwath. They conveniently left out these parts:
"Dalton McGuinty has had two terms to prove he is the right person for the job — and has completely failed. If times get tough over the next few years, we can't afford to have Gilligan in command."
- James Phieffer, Belleville Intelligencer, Oct. 1, 2011
"Frankly, it's a bit rich that McGuinty, the guy who twice promised not to hike our taxes — and then promptly raised our taxes twice — can now look us in the eye and complain about another politician not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
Christina BlizzardToronto Sun, Oct. 1, 2011
"So why's McGuinty so worked up about all of this? Clearly polls are showing them that Horwath is gaining — big time. Compared to the lacklustre performance of the two men during the debate, she shone."
Christina BlizzardToronto Sun, Oct. 1, 2011
"The danger for Mr. McGuinty is that voters, concerned about their pocketbooks and cognizant of new economic realities, are wary of what he'll next ask of them as the province tries to get its finances in order."
Adam Radwanski, Globe and Mail, Oct. 1, 2011
Apparently, my opinions of other parties are held in high esteem by the powers that be within the Ontario Liberals and NDP.  Notably - or likely not - they seem less taken with my observations on their own parties.  Significant?  No more so than an observation on the likelihood of the sun rising in the east.  But for a writer, knowing someone saw fit to read and share my thoughts on anything is something of an ego-boost.

Hudak Makes the Grade (Barely)

After a complete snooze-fest of a campaign, with important non-issues being argued about for it's entirety, the big day is almost upon us. On Thursday, October 6, Ontarians will go to the polls to decide who will be handed the responsibility of governing us for the next four years (or potentially less, if it's a minority government).

In light of the seriousness of the responsibility, and the economic turbulence already tossing Europe about, and making our fiscal flight increasingly unsteady, it would have been appropriate for the party leaders to demonstrate a solid grasp of what needs to be done to reign in government spending, and otherwise prepare the province for what is increasingly looking like a rough decade ahead.

But no. Instead we got Andrea Horwath, leader of the NDP, demonstrating her complete unreadiness for the job of premier at every turn, by responding to every concern with another goofy promise. Gas prices too high? Cap them – which when done, in practice has locked the prices at that cap, and no lower, in jurisdictions where it's been tried. Similar situations brought forth promises such as canceling contracts with Quebec based industries to supply goods to the Ontario government, and implement a strict “Buy Ontario” policy – ignoring the Ontario business' which would be hurt if Quebec and other jurisdictions returned the favour.

We had “Premier Dad”, Liberal leader Dalton McGuinty, trying to convince us that when he says no more taxes this time, he means it – unlike in 2003 and 2007. But as he's saying this, he's racked up the biggest deficits in Ontario history, government spending has exploded during his tenure at Queen's Park, his government has seen the e-Health boondoggle as well as the worst example of corporate welfare in provincial history – the $7 billion Samsung deal. 50,000 jobs promised, 20,000 supposedly created, but with no evidence to back up this assertion anywhere – your tax dollars at work. His government has been marked by a failure to demonstrate any sense of fiscal sanity, runaway spending, and broken promises. Dalton McGuinty has had two terms to prove he is the right person for the job – and has completely failed. If times get tough over the next few years, we can't afford to have Gilligan in command.

So that leaves Tim Hudak, whom I (ever so reluctantly) endorse as Ontario's next premier. I do so because he has shown fewer flaws than Horwath or McGuinty. While his economic plan is only slightly more solid than McGuinty's, and Hudak's shown a distressing reluctance to actually say what spending cuts he'd make to get the budget balanced, he does seem to get the fact that what has gone on for the last eight years cannot continue. Hudak needs, however, to focus. Deal with the major issues, and do it now – no more of the dog distracted by a squirrel routine. He has to lay out his plan for returning Ontario to fiscal stability – and then do it.

I have a much easier time endorsing Todd Smith for Prince Edward – Hastings MP. He is a solid citizen of the riding, someone who's involved in the community, and through his work in local news and sports, someone who truly sees what's happening in the area. He is someone who is aiming to serve the riding well, and I believe he is the best option for voters in Hastings and Prince Edward counties, and in the city of Belleville.

So give the matter thought. You may agree or disagree with me – we have the freedom to do so in this, the best country in the world. But, regardless of whom you support – make sure you get out and vote on October 6.

And if you can't be bothered to vote – don't complain. The political opinions of those too lazy to vote are not worth others wasting their time listening.

Sunday 25 September 2011

Moore to the Point – Christ, the Church, and Pat Robertson

By Russell D. Moore - from Moore to the Point


This week on his television show Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson said a man would be morally justified to divorce his wife with Alzheimer’s disease in order to marry another woman. The dementia-riddled wife is, Robertson said, “not there” anymore. This is more than an embarrassment. This is more than cruelty. This is a repudiation of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Few Christians take Robertson all that seriously anymore. Most roll their eyes, and shake their heads when he makes another outlandish comment (for instance, defending China’s brutal one-child abortion policy to identifying God’s judgment on specific actions in the September 11 attacks, Hurricane Katrina, or the Haiti earthquake). This is serious, though, because it points to an issue that is much bigger than Robertson.

Marriage, the Scripture tells us, is an icon of something deeper, more ancient, more mysterious. The marriage union is a sign, the Apostle Paul announces, of the mystery of Christ and his church (Eph. 5). The husband, then, is to love his wife “as Christ loved the church” (Eph. 5:25). This love is defined not as the hormonal surge of romance but as a self-sacrificial crucifixion of self. The husband pictures Christ when he loves his wife by giving himself up for her.

At the arrest of Christ, his Bride, the church, forgot who she was, and denied who he was. He didn’t divorce her. He didn’t leave.

The Bride of Christ fled his side, and went back to their old ways of life. When Jesus came to them after the resurrection, the church was about the very thing they were doing when Jesus found them in the first place: out on the boats with their nets. Jesus didn’t leave. He stood by his words, stood by his Bride, even to the Place of the Skull, and beyond.

A woman or a man with Alzheimer’s can’t do anything for you. There’s no romance, no sex, no partnership, not even companionship. That’s just the point. Because marriage is a Christ/church icon, a man loves his wife as his own flesh. He cannot sever her off from him simply because she isn’t “useful” anymore.

Pat Robertson’s cruel marriage statement is no anomaly. He and his cohorts have given us for years a prosperity gospel with more in common with an Asherah pole than a cross. They have given us a politicized Christianity that uses churches to “mobilize” voters rather than to stand prophetically outside the power structures as a witness for the gospel.

But Jesus didn’t die for a Christian Coalition; he died for a church. And the church, across the ages, isn’t significant because of her size or influence. She is weak, helpless, and spattered in blood. He is faithful to us anyway.

If our churches are to survive, we must repudiate this Canaanite mammonocracy that so often speaks for us. But, beyond that, we must train up a new generation to see the gospel embedded in fidelity, a fidelity that is cruciform.

It’s easy to teach couples to put the “spark” back in their marriages, to put the “sizzle” back in their sex lives. You can still worship the self and want all that. But that’s not what love is. Love is fidelity with a cross on your back. Love is drowning in your own blood. Love is screaming, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.”

Sadly, many of our neighbors assume that when they hear the parade of cartoon characters we allow to speak for us, that they are hearing the gospel. They assume that when they see the giggling evangelist on the television screen, that they see Jesus. They assume that when they see the stadium political rallies to “take back America for Christ,” that they see Jesus. But Jesus isn’t there.

Jesus tells us he is present in the weak, the vulnerable, the useless. He is there in the least of these (Matt. 25:31-46). Somewhere out there right now, a man is wiping the drool from an 85 year-old woman who flinches because she think he’s a stranger. No television cameras are around. No politicians are seeking a meeting with them.

But the gospel is there. Jesus is there.


Moore is the Dean of the School of Theology and Senior Vice-President for Academic Administration at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.  He can be reached by e-mail at rmoore@sbts.edu.

Moore to the Point – Christ, the Church, and Pat Robertson:

'via Blog this'

Saturday 24 September 2011

Christie Blatchford: Bureaucracy calls shots on reservists | Full Comment | National Post

That Canada’s reserve army routinely gets the shaft comes as news to no one, least of all the country’s long-suffering reservists.
As one reserve officer I know says, “In the civilian world, we would be the third shift at the Ford plant … or the casual part-time force that has no union, no guarantees, no benefits and no representation.
“We’re almost like discretionary spending.”
Still, the report, which was released this week by the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute and the Canadian International Council, is nonetheless startling.
Written by distinguished military scholar and veteran Dr. Jack English, it shows how the bureaucracy in Ottawa — an incestuous nest of regular army bosses with turf to protect and intractable civil servants — has consistently ignored or thwarted government directives to increase the size of the reserves.
What’s more, either those defence ministers whose pledges came to nought had the collective attention span of gnats, or they failed to grow a set of nuts sufficient to demand their instructions be followed, or they were simply shifted within Cabinet and the new fellow came in.
Any way you look at it, Dr. English says, the bureaucracy is calling the shots.
In the result, despite pledges to grow the reserves, the militia part-time head count remains still at about 16,500, or, as Dr. English wryly notes, about the size of National Defence Headquarters, or NDHQ as it’s called.
By the way, just getting the damn numbers out of NDHQ is a trick.
David Pratt, the former Liberal MP who wrote another report on Canada’s citizen soldiers for the CDFAI this spring — he takes a different approach, but certainly shares the view that the reserves have been neglected — first asked the Library of Parliament for an accurate count of reservists.
The library approached the Canadian Forces, which in turn essentially said it could go back only three years and couldn’t come up with a proper count.
In referring to this explanation in his report, Dr. English scornfully labels it “typical Byzantine, prevaricating gobbledygook.”
Virtually everyone who has studied the Canadian army, and their number is legion, agrees on a couple of things: The bureaucracy is obscenely bloated, far out of proportion for the size of the army; the citizen soldier, who until called up to full-time service costs only about 20% of the regular one, is a bargain for the taxpayer; the militia is more diverse, ethnically and otherwise, than the regular army.
Easily the most important report was that done recently by Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, an NDHQ insider who knew where to look for the skeletons and who has the courage to call them what they are. His findings buttress the veracity of Dr. English’s report.
As Lt.-Gen. Leslie writes in his executive summary of the myriad studies and reviews that preceded his, “These various efforts have resulted in hundreds of recommendations, some of which are innovative and first class, some of which are not.
“A number are quietly buried in the bowels of filing cabinets as being too hard or too threatening of the status quo.
“The eventual result was usually not what was originally intended, and in far too many instances, the headquarters and other overhead grew while ships were being decommissioned, regular and reserve battalions were disbanded and whole aircraft fleets cashed in.”
In other words, both men conclude in their different language, the bureaucratic tail is wagging the Parliamentary dog.
Part of the difficulty in any discussion about the reserves is that as a force based in armouries spread across the country, they are diffused, and don’t always speak with a single voice.
Part of the difficulty is that there are so many categories of reservists — Class A, the part-timers who serve in Canada; Class B, those employed full-time in Canada; Class C, those deployed on overseas operations — that the civilian brain, or this one anyway, can barely wrap her head around the distinctions.
And part of the difficulty is that the reserves are controlled by the leaders of the regular army. There are no reserve generals; the highest reserve position is a major-general, or two-star, role, and whoever has the job is outranked and outnumbered by the regulars.
This is no slur upon the regular army, troops or officers: Canada’s is among the best-fighting army in the world, as its magnificent performance in Afghanistan demonstrated. And on the battlefield level, with regular and reserve soldiers fighting (and dying) together in Kandahar, the differences disappeared.
But the senior leaders of the regular army have the same self-protection instincts as anyone else, and especially in rough economic times, they’re not likely to go to bat for their part-time brothers.
Canadians ought to care about the state of reservists: It’s these men and women who bring to the profession of arms not just the skills but also the sensibilities of the larger civilian world, who best straddle the divide. They are the living connection between the people of this country and the military, and for that reason alone should be treasured and nourished.
Yet it’s harder now to join up as a reservist — an application that used to take a week to process at the local level now takes as long as four months, thanks to that monstrous bureaucracy — than ever before.
Besides, the notion that the fonctionnaires have done and will do what they like, regardless of government orders, should offend everyone, even those who don’t give a fig about matters military.

Christie Blatchford: Bureaucracy calls shots on reservists | Full Comment | National Post:

'via Blog this'