Mr. Ziffy Does Not Know Canada

 As Rex Murphy has so eloquently states it, Mr. Ziffy just does not know or get Canada.
Mr. Ziffy believes that being out of the country for so many years has made him a" better Canadian."  Huh?   Because I haven't been a world traveler and out of the country for years, does that make me "less of a Canadian?

Mr. Ignatieff, in a recent Toronto speech, tried a little rhetorical judo on the Conservative ads. He tried to project the idea of Canada as a place in continual evolution, as the most internationalist of countries, and went so far as to say his "being out of the country" actually made him a better Canadian.
This last claim was merely excess and nonsense since, in logic, he'd be the perfect Canadian, by his terms ... if he'd never come back at all.

You need to know the country on a basic local level. You need to feel it. Rex thinks Mr Ziffy doesn't feel it thus the success of the "Just Visiting" ads the CPC put out were successful. You need to get out and get to really know the people and they are all about. What we're thinking, what we're feeling. Ziffy just doesn't get it.  In other words, you need to connect to the people, the surroundings etc. You need to know what makes the country tick.

Let me be clear on this point. His absence is not a disqualification for our highest office, but it is a mighty obstacle. The common-sense response to having lived "out of country" for so long is that he cannot know it. We are, we Canadians, very much where we live. We learn our country by living in it, by absorbing the flow of its events, by acquiring an emotional as well as an intellectual grasp of its rhythms and moods. We inhabit this country, and it returns the favour: It inhabits us.
What's implicit in Mr. Ignatieff's picture of Canada is that there's nothing fixed, common and settled here. This is ludicrous. Canada is not a centreless void: There is, very much, a here, here. We have our social and civic codes. There are, beneath the multitude of our separate and diverse peoples and regions, great central patterns of common attitude, shared value, a signature take on the outside world and an understanding of our entwined interrelationships.
Canada isn't a blank slate waiting for the inscriptions of unending diversity. There is an essence to this country. What we have in common, the core, is that which enables the embrace of diversity in the first place. Mr. Ignatieff may understand some of this, but does he feel it? Does he perceive the strength and depth of the common endeavour which has been and is this country since its founding? Canadians are far more patriotic than, outside hockey triumphs, they let on.
The public then is perhaps anxious that the man aspiring to be prime minister, while abundant of intellect is impoverished of experience, that he lacks the emotional knowledge and feel for this country that is the product of daily lived encounter with it and its people. Can he give it a "local habitation and a name?"
So at both ends of the political scale, the district and the national, the question of understanding and really knowing the people and country is the central one. Proportional representation is a step away from full engagement of the representative and the people he or she represents. Michael Ignattief's core weakness is that so many Canadians are withholding assent to him as their leader because they do feel that, at the most profound level, perhaps he does not know their country.

Here is one example of him being out of touch with the country's mood, abortion. This from John Snobelen, the Toronto Sun

So why are we suddenly talking about abortion? Michael Ignatieff.
Ignatieff would like you to believe there is a vast right wing, neo-con, radical right, fundamental Christian conspiracy to ban abortion. Desperate for a wedge issue, he has dusted off the old, tired hidden agenda stuff.
Trouble is, Ignatieff managed to wedge himself. The boy is sharp.

Mr. Ziffy at one time compared our flag to a beer commercial. He said the only thing he missed about Canada was Algonquin Park.  Times have changed. The country is different than when he was here before. Maybe he should go out and smell some more barns.

Do As I Say Not As I Do

Liberals demand that the government must allow staffers testify in front of committees to raked over the coals by the opposition for  political gain and yet Liberals in committee hearing  fillibustered  to prevent their own from testifying. 
Derek Lee has been accused of lobbying when it was found on a website for a law firm he works for.

OTTAWA - The Liberals shielded one of their own Thursday from answering questions about alleged lobbying at the same committee where they have grilled former Tory MP Rahim Jaffer over similar accusations.

Their efforts elicited accusations of hypocrisy from the Conservatives, who have been hammered this week by the Liberals for telling ministerial staff not to testify at parliamentary committees.

I mean this is the height of hypocrisy. Conservative ministerial staffers have to appear and be hammered by a hostile opposition instead of the Minister to score political points meanwhile Liberals accused of something that could be inappropriate don't have to testify to clear things up? Something is definitely wrong with this picture.

Committees used to be where the work for Canadians actually got done. Not so much anymore, they've become kangaroo courts where there's nothing but witch hunts for political gain. Look at for instance the special committee for the mission in Afghanistan. They should be discussing our mission over there and how better to improve our chances at winning and what we should do next after our combat mission.  All they do is talk about how Taliban detainees are being treated and trying to tar the troops and the government with war crimes and so called cover ups. Then there is the Guergis/Jaffer issue, drugs, shady characters and busty hookers. Disgusting! It all about gotcha politics!

Committees are becoming a joke. We are paying for these clowns to waste time and money on stuff like this.

Are they getting any of the public's business done? One wonders. To be fair though, the media is complicit in these circuses by covering them live and reporting on them ad nauseam.

Perhaps if the media would focus less on this kind of garbage and focus more on the committees that are actually doing some work, maybe the circus atmosphere at committees would lessen too. One can only hope!

Well, It's About Time!

It seems like MPs are finally breaking to the pressure from the public on opening their books to Auditor General Sheila Fraser in having a look at their expenses. They have been stonewalling for weeks now giving all kinds of lame excuses why not to have their expenses audited.  They could have saved all this trouble  by telling Ms. Fraser from the get go, she can see anything she so chooses at her convenience. They wouldn't have looked as though they're trying to hide something.  I think though, the optics were terrible and has left a bad taste in the mouths of the public.

At least now the Conservatives have come up with some proposals that Government House Leader, Jay Hill will present to the Board of Internal Economy next week.

The moves come as a new poll suggests four out of five Canadians believe their MPs are breaking the rules on expense claims.

The Conservatives have come up with a plan to end the controversy around the disclosure of MP expenses that would allow Auditor-General Sheila Fraser to look at the books of members of Parliament and senators.
In developing the proposal, the Tories hope to halt the barrage of criticism directed at MPs of all stripes since the Board of Internal Economy, the committee of MPs responsible for House of Commons expenses, declined two weeks ago to let Ms. Fraser audit Parliament’s financial statements.

Well it's at least a start. The MPs and Senators  must not put any conditions on the AG in what she can see and not see.  She should be given full disclosure. If they don't, the whole thing will still stink. The public has been outraged over this as indicated by a Harris Decima poll,  and rightly so.

The moves come as a new poll suggests four out of five Canadians believe their MPs are breaking the rules on expense claims.
The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey is bad news for parliamentarians who have collectively rejected a request by Auditor General Sheila Fraser to examine half a billion dollars in annual spending.

 The Harris-Decima poll of just over 1,000 respondents found that just 12 per cent believe it unlikely that MPs are claiming expenses against the rules.
The survey follows high-profile news coverage of expense claim scandals in Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and Britain.
Fully 85 per cent of those polled said they were concerned about the MPs’ refusal to let Fraser look at their books, including 52 per cent who were very concerned.

The public does have a right to know how our MPs and Senators  are spending our money.  It just makes sense.
This  is proof we can have an affect on our politicians and that we still have power over them.  We need to keep our foot on their throats until the AG has access to whatever she needs and is actually in doing what she does best, making sure Canadians are getting value for money.

I want to thank my fellow Canadians for  applying the pressure.  Keep it up!  We are their employers, they are our employees.  Let us all keep that in mind. 

PM Harper Gets Top Grade From Usual Libluvin Columnist

Jeffery Simpson is usually tepid at best in heaping any praise for PM Harper and his government. This time he gives resounding praise for this government.   He gives PM Stephen Harper an "A" for Canada's new research program.

Stephen Harper’s government deserves an “A” for the conception, execution and delivery of the program that lured 19 renowned scientists to Canada from overseas.
                                *******************************
So good is this program that the federal government should repeat the exercise in a few years, widening the criteria to include humanities and social sciences and insisting that the winners teach some undergraduates.
                                 *****************************
The CERC program, with its lofty but limited ambition, was not designed to address any of these endemic problems. Instead, it set out to improve the country’s scientific research capabilities by adding excellence from overseas. The process was well-conceived, the public policy purposes important and the results, well, excellent.

I just want to give Jeffery Simpson an "A" for this decent piece where he gives credit where credit is due.  
Quite a difference from Susan Delacourt's piece griping that no women were included in the program.

OTTAWA – Not one woman was among the recipients this week when Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government handed out big dollars for big thinkers.
Of the 19 people who were selected to be the first of the “prestigious” Canada Excellence Research Chairs, receiving up to $10-million in total in federal money over the next seven years, all were men.

Delacourt's piece basically turns what should be positive story that is good for the country into a women's issue and a slag fest against the PM.
Kudo's to Simpson for his well thought out positive column. Keep it up.  It's not very often the PM and his government get positive press from  usual lefty journalists. Thank you Mr. Simpson!

Liberals Pine for Ole Days

Libluvin columnist Larry Martin, speculates the Libs are pining for the "good ole Chretien days." Probably, but the way writes his column, I think he is the one that 's pining.

It’s Jean Chretien’s day today.

The old warrior’s portrait, which is to be hung in the halls of Parliament, will be unveiled in a ceremony hosted by Prime Minister Stephen Harper tonight.

A safe bet is there will be a lot of Liberals in attendance wishing Chretien was still around.

“Ah, the good old days.” That will be the phrase on everyone’s lips as his three straight majority election victories are recalled.

His legacy is getting better with time, particularly on account of what has happened since he stepped down in 2003. The once-proud party has staggered ever since. Paul Martin won a minority and then was defeated. Stéphane Dion took over and the party declined further. Michael Ignatieff replaced him and the party’s latest poll standing is at 25 per cent.

 Yeah right, pine for HRDC  boondoggles, Shawinigate, Adscam, decade of darkness for the military, treat farmers like criminals. and "the culture of entitlement" 

The Chretien good ole days? "Da little guy from Shawinigan" who throttles an innocent protester almost to death.  Yeah right! What a legacy!  Good ole days for Liberanos not for Canada.

More fond rememberance.

 One piece of encouragement Chretien will be able to provide is a reference to his own experience. He served as opposition leader for three years and had a terrible time almost every step of the way...and won.
Another sign of hope is that the party’s major opponent isn’t exactly setting the world on fire

Larry your party isn't exactly exciting the population either. Your leader is a dud.  All your party has to offer is muckraking trying to drum up faux scandals.  And oh, Larry, btw, good ole Chretien faced a very fractured right. 
It's not the '90's anymore. The world has changed. Larry, you're living in the past. Time to get with the times. The population is getting older and more conservative. Apparently Larry hasn't heard what Stephane Dion's wife, Janine Kreiber has said about the state of Libranos.

The Liberal Party is falling apart, and will not recover. Like all liberal parties in Europe, it will become a weakling at the mercy of ephemeral coalitions. By refusing the historic coalition that would have placed it at the helm of the left, it will be punished by history.

Larry Martin might as well face it, the Libranos will not be the powerful force it once was in the forseeable future if a at all anymore. I don't see the Libs getting enough seats to even get a small minority never mind a majority. They would have to gain at least 50 seats. I don't know where they would get those.  Where as the Conservatives only need 10 to 12 more seats for majority. That is very doable.

A coalition with the NDP will form enough seats to govern, they would have to include the Bloc and Canadians will not tolerate that at all.
 So get used to Conservatives in government for the foreseeable future.