May 30, 2011
I totally agree with the featured letter to the editor in the KW Record today:
Mayor should show some leadership
(And for what it’s worth, I’m in favor of moving ahead with LRT. We just can’t afford to keep building and maintaining more roads, and I think a train system will be a more effective alternative than buses.)
May 7, 2011
When I say I found the election results depressing, I mean it literally: when it was announced, I burst into tears. Events that might otherwise have cheered me—the collapse of the Bloc Québecois, the election of Elizabeth May, even that entertaining bunch of new NDP MPs from Québec—were completely eclipsed by that Majority result. I had trouble sleeping, trouble eating, was given to random bursts of anger: The whole week has felt like a bad dream.
I’m only now starting to feel like I may be in recovery.
As with ScotchNeat, the thing I found most alarming in the result, and in the polling numbers throughout, was just how many Canadians were willing to vote Conservative at all. 25% of the population; 40% of the electorate: That’s a hell of a lot. Ultimately, you can’t blame this result on NDP vote splitting, or even the Liberals’ lacklustre campaign… Hate to be obvious, but the real problem here is the people who voted Conservative.
Because of those voters, will Canada remain as the worst Global Warming offender, not only doing nothing ourselves, but also trying to prevent other countries from making progress. Civil servants will continue to be fired if they dare to tell Canadians a truths the Conservatives don’t want us to hear. Aid to Africa will continue to decline, though it’s in Canada’s long-term economic interest that the continent prosper. More young men will go to jail longer, and learn to become better criminals. (And Conservatives will continue to hide how much that costs.) In this more dangerous Canada, police will no longer be able to rely on the long-gun registry information to help them solve crimes. The quality of Canadian social, scientific, and business research will continue to decline, not only because of funding cuts, but also because those groups no longer have reliable census data to work with. And so on, and on.
People who voted Conservative not only approved of all that, but asked for more, please. They watched all those horrible, negative ads and thought, “That’s for me! Those are my people!” I mean, I’d almost feel bad for them, and their dim view of humanity, if they weren’t dragging me down with them.
But, OK, fine, I’m in recovery. So, what the hell did happen in Québec? Damned if I know; I haven’t lived there in 20 years. But Chantal Hébert has an interesting and positive take on it.
And what the hell happened to the Liberals in Ontario? Don’t know either, but here’s a clue, maybe, in Glen Pearson’s report. He was a popular Liberal MP, expected to win his seat. In the end, he lost it to the Conservatives. But as he notes, the loss wasn’t completely a surprise.
Yet I’d had something of a premonition of the outcome during the last few days of the contest. At doors I canvassed I kept hearing certain stories about how I spent too much time in Africa, or that my voting presence in the House wasn’t too impressive. When I informed them that I only spent one week a year on that continent (Sudan), and that I take it on my holiday time over New Years and on my own dime, I could sense the hesitation in their voice. “Oh … that’s not what we heard when the Conservatives phoned us last night.”
….
It was frustrating, but I didn’t know who to talk to. It was only when the election was over that a good Conservative friend informed me that they had actually been utilizing a central office for phone calls and that none of them emanated from London itself. They had poured big money from afar into influencing my riding.
I’ll paraphrase for Mr. Pearson. In his riding, the Conservatives ran a centralized campaign to call people up and lie about him.
But, probably only in that one riding, right? Surely their central office didn’t call up other Ontarians and tell them “creative truths” about their Liberal MPs? Nah. I’m sure that had nothing to do with it…
May 1, 2011
At times, this election campaign has made me really cranky. With politicians. With the media. With other Canadians.
But it hasn’t had all been bad. To my surprise, some things have actually been inspiring. Who would have expected that?
Votes mobs: The enthusiasm of youth
Inspired by a Rick Mercer rant, vote mobs are groups of young people who swarm political functions or other public spaces, encouraging people to vote.Will they actually turn around the typically dismal showing of voters under 25? I don’t know, especially that the timing couldn’t be worse for university and college students.
But regardless, they’ve left behind a nice YouTube legacy, like this one from McMaster:
Civil online debates: Yes, we can
The typical comments section on most political articles (or YouTube videos) tends to make you despair for humanity as a whole. But under this article in an American online publication (decent in itself) is a bunch of really well-informed, civil, intelligent comments from what seems to be across the political spectrum. (Until a spammer joins in at the end. Ah well, better that than a troll.)
And though I’m biased from knowing the blogger, the non-partisan Procedure and politics has been a nice oasis of rationality, showing that you can calmly dissect how politicians and the media sometimes get it wrong, all without calling anyone a “stupidhead”. (Also a great place to learn about Britain’s upcoming referendum, if you were wondering about that. Or maybe you didn’t even know they were having one?)
The return of oratory
I’m a sucker for a great orator. Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, John Kennedy… I don’t know if these guys were great leaders. But they sure talked nice. I loved listening to all of them.
In Canada, we haven’t had a great federal orator since… What… Pierre Trudeau, I think?
Or so I thought. Until I actually started listening to Michael Ignatieff speak. It started at their platform announcement, part of which I watched online. This was in the midst of all the commentary about Harper’s “bubble” — not taking questions, hiding from the public. So to see Ignatieff speaking so easily, so clearly, sans notes or teleprompters, answering questions from everyone, at such a strategic juncture—I was kind of impressed.
But it was only after coming back from vacation, having missed the debates (where, I hear, Ignatieff didn’t do that well), I found this YouTube video getting a lot of play:
That I became really really impressed. I liked what he said. And how he said it. And apparently, that wasn’t even him at his best.
I started to wonder if I was just in some weird Liberal spell here, when Rick Mercer (him again!) commented on a similar experience:
And then there was Prince Edward Island, where, in a curling club, Ignatieff showed off a set of skills I had no idea that he possessed. From a pure showbiz perspective he killed. Speaking without a teleprompter or notes he gave perhaps the best speech I have heard since watching Gen. Rick Hillier address the troops in Kandahar.
His speech also inspired this non-partisan song on voting for what you believe in–”Rise Up Canada!” (A song for Canada’s 2011 Federal Election):
Of course, people like Blair, Clinton, Obama, and Kennedy all had such personal charisma, their elocutionary skills were just icing on the cake. With Ignatieff, it’s the whole cake. In this day and age, that seems to not be enough. But damn, it’s nice to hear anyway.
Creative protest: Hanging with the cool kids
I like civil debate, and I like neutral calls to vote, but I have picked a side. So, I’ve also appreciated the many people, much more creative and eloquent than I, who have to the same conclusion about who they are voting for, and produced online materials as to why. There’s tons of it, but I’ll just mention a few. I’ve already tweeted about Shane Koycan’s powerful “Wasted Votes” video. (He’s the spoken-word poet who appeared at the Olympics by the way: the “We Are More” poem.) I also enjoyed Margaret Atwood’s comparison of the Conservatives to a vaccum salesman who insists you buy his product, but won’t tell you the cost.
And this mock ad—Too Smart for Canada—made me laugh out loud. So close to the actual ones, some people think it’s real.
The NDP surge
Of course, we don’t yet know if this will stick and have a real effect in the end. All we can know for sure, is that among those that were polled, there has been a shift. In Quebec, the NDP has risen considerably; that has been spreading to other regions. And why does this please me?
I’m not afraid of NDP policies or what them having more power might mean. All evidence shows that the NDP becomes very pragmatic once handed power. And if you look closely at what they’re proposing, it’s full of caveats that gives them plenty of wiggle room to ensure Canada does not become a deficit-ridden, high-tax, socialist mess.
But this is in no way changes how I plan to vote. The conditions, for me, remain the same. Local polls show no evidence of an NDP surge. Plus, my local NDP candidate is a 27-year-old with no political experience at all, whereas the Liberal one is a past MP with a record for actually going with his conscience against his own party, which is a rare thing indeed. And another thing I view positively.
April 10, 2011
Currently offering their amazing The Suburbs album for a mere $3.50 for high-quality download. Wow.
Their exceedingly polite blog post encouraging Canadians to vote. Only, maybe not Conservative...
April 8, 2011
In this election, it seems to me that the Liberals are campaigning relatively well. And that the Conservatives are campaigning relatively poorly.
The first week was all about “reckless coalitions”, which has been debunked and declared a distraction and makes them look a bit stupid, especially when quotes such as this are located:
… what will be the test is whether there’s then any party in opposition that’s able to form a coalition or working alliance with the others. And I think we have a political system that’s going to continue to have three or four different parties, or five different parties, and so I think parties that want to form government are going to eventually have to learn to work together.
— Stephen Harper (1991)
(Source TVO, via Procedure and Politics)
So why try that? Well, apart from their peek popularity having occurred when the other parties threatened to make the unpopular Stephane Dion prime minister by coalition, I also think they don’t want Canadians to remember what made the other parties do that.
For whatever reason, the Conservatives have a good reputation on the economy. They are especially proud of the stimulus package, Canada’s Action Plan. So proud they spent $26 million taxpayer dollars telling us it was wonderful. After the program was over. (More proof of their great fiscal management, of course.)
However. When last elected, as the recession was taking hold, the Conservatives presented a fiscal update that cut spending, and provide no stimulus whatsoever. Only after and because of the coalition “crisis” did we get a new budget, containing Canada’s Action Plan (with a segue through the proroguing of Parliament).
But how can the NDP and Liberals remind Canadians of that without playing into Harper’s talking points on their “secret coalition plans”? Best to say nothing.
So, maybe Harper isn’t really campaigning that badly. Maybe he’s achieved exactly what he wanted here, in poisoning another perfect valid idea to the point it can’t even mentioned. Last election carbon taxes (still a toxic subject), this election governance by coalition.
Of course, this week we’ve moved on to the Conservatives’ excesses in shutting out those who disagree with them:
This last young woman, Joanna MacDonald from Guelph, is the one planning to start on online campaign called Stephen Harper is afraid to meet me, which I think is hilarious. And so I’m borrowing her line, since I also think something should be done to combat global warming, so I ought to be equally frightening.
Also fun? Rick Mercer’s Mr. Harper, are you on your meds? from Macleans, which takes pokes at all parties, starting with this:
The government was defeated on a confidence motion because they were in contempt of the Canadian Parliament—a vote that Stephen Harper immediately claimed did not occur. He didn’t argue about the semantics of the vote; he simply denied it happened at all, preferring instead to believe his government was defeated on the budget. There is evidence to the contrary: he was there and it was on TV, but still, as far as he is concerned, it didn’t happen.
March 3, 2011
The Conservative’s attack ads against Michael Ignatieff (I refuse to link to them) have such a peculiar tone. Like our main worry about him should be that he used to work at Harvard. Or ending the one ad that seems to run particularly frequently with this “ominous” Ignatieff quote:
I wish my country were a little better.
Really?
Him wanting to improve Canada is supposed to make us not want to vote Liberal?
But clearly, the Conservatives think that’s bad. So the Conservative’s political goals, then, are to make Canada worse?
You know, that actually explains a lot…
February 28, 2011
*** When the Levees Broke (August 2006) – Rental
Spike Lee documentary looking back at Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath.
She says: This four-part documentary uses copious interviews, mostly with those involved, to tell the story of Hurricane Katrina. You revisit parts you heard about at the time, and learn a great deal that you probably did not. I remain stunned at just how badly the US government treated its own people, at the time, and afterward.
He says: This is a bit of downer.
December 19, 2010
***½ Fair Game (November 2010) – Theatre
Naomi Watts, Sean Penn. The story of Valerie Plame, who status as an undercover CIA operative was leaked by Bush administration officials after her husband publicly questioned their intelligence on Iraq.
She says: Seeing all the Bush-ites at work again, building their phony case against Iraq, is infuriating. The story of Valerie Plame’s work before the leak and the effect it has afterward, on those she worked with, and on her marriage, is riveting. It makes me curious to read her book, though I guess it’s heavily censored. (Speaking of which, look at the credits at the end…)
He says: Well, that was frightening. Hard to believe that actually happened.
December 5, 2010
This kinds of pisses me off:
Federal parties agree to scrap bill correcting voting inequalities
The Harper government and the opposition parties have agreed to quietly sink legislation that would have given Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta more seats in the House of Commons. As a result, urban and visible-minority voters will continue to be discriminated against in Parliament.
Under the legislation, Ontario would have received 18 new seats, British Columbia seven, and Alberta five, bringing all three provinces up to the level of representation in the House warranted by their populations.
Though the above is denied by the government, the bill has been given one day of debate so far, so it’s not exactly speeding on its way to passage. The fear, apparently, is of angering Quebec and Maritime voters.
So fellow Ontarians, BCers, and Albertans, if you really want to have an impact on the next federal election, you’d best move to another province, where your vote will actually have weight.
Because in Canada, everyone is equal. Only, some of us are more equal than others.
August 7, 2010
I tell you, this federal government of ours certainly has a talent for making me enraged over issues I previously didn’t give two figs about.
I did this personality test thingie recently that said, on how I relate to other people, is that most of all, I just want them to make sense. Probably why I’m employed in the geeky world of computers, driven by the implacable software logic of 1s and 0s. And certainly why politics in general, and the Conservative party in particular, make me crazy.
According to Jeffrey Simpson in The Globe and Mail, making the long-form census optional was all Stephen Harper’s idea, and both Tony Clement and Jim Flaherty opposed it. But any points Clement might have gained (from me) for that initial stance has been squandered by his soldering on, defending the thing.
Of course, the particularities of the defense need to keep changing in light of those pesky facts. First I heard him on CBC Radio arguing that the optional census would be just as good, and if you can’t trust the government on that, at least trust Stats Canada! Because they were totally behind this!
That complete lie was exposed with the dramatic (at least in the world of stats) resignation of the head of Stats Canada over those allegations.
Round two. OK, so the data won’t be as good, but it’s worth it, because it’s just too much intrusion on people’s lives. Oh, and like the tax form isn’t? Way more personal, really, and not anonymized! Also, there was the irritating fact that there was no evidence of mass complaints about the census, and exactly zero people had ever been jailed for not filling it in.
Meanwhile, the list of those opposed to scraping the mandatory census continued to grow.
Round three. All these critics are just moochers on the federal government. They just don’t want to do the heavy lifting themselves, and get their own data.
Imagine. Thinking that a Federal government should centralize a service useful to all Canadians! Crazy talk! Of course, every level of government and every agency should raise their taxes and deficits and prices so they can all do their own mandatory census (let’s ignore they don’t power of law behind for that), then spend even more money trying put all these separate surveys together into a coherent package! That is so much more inefficient and time-consuming and expensive, it’s got to be the better way, right?
(Maybe this is a weird stimulus package?)
And the thing, this whole mess isn’t even giving the Conservatives a political advantage. It’s not like the other illogical things they like to get behind, like fighting imaginary crime, that will at least instinctively appeal to some. Nobody cares about the census.
Or they didn’t. But they now do, but they don’t agree with Conservatives, who are now at their lowest poll numbers in ages. Which would be the one thing to be happy about, except that no one other single party is really gaining tons of support either, so Conservatives would probably still win the damn election with another minority.
