Liberal Media Getting Frustrated With Iffy Flip Flops?

It hasn't been a very good week for the liberal media in this country.  Tuesday morning the liberal media woke up to a conservative Mayor in Toronto. That's not supposed to happen you know especially in lefty latte sipping Toronto.  A couple of polls come out  with the federal Conservative party surging ahead with their dear Liberal party either dropping or stagnate.  Then you have Iffy virtually kill one of his own members bill on clamping down on Canadian mining activities in foreign countries.  Heck, he didn't even show up himself. Doesn't do much for his credibility now does it?

Rumours swirled in advance of the vote, with some reports suggesting that Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff — who has spoken out against McKay's bill — had ordered party whip Marcel Proulx to tell caucus members not to attend the contentious vote, or to stay away if they planned on voting no. However, Opposition House Leader David McGuinty said he hoped the bill would pass.
Ignatieff told reporters that while he does not support the bill, he favours its principles.
"This is a private member's bill. I've made my reservations about the bill known for months, but I think it sends a very important message about corporate social responsibility," said Ignatieff, who did not vote on McKay's bill.

 Now the  media seems frustrated with Iffy.  No one really knows where he or the party really stands on this mining bill or other issues for that matter.  So yesterday  Liberal cheerleader, Jane Taber wrote a column scolding Iffy. She rarely does that. She always bashes Conservatives so this was a real change for her. In fact The Iceman has a great post on that.

Today the Toronto Star's editorial   also not happy with Iffy.

Where exactly does Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff stand on efforts to ensure that Canada’s mining, oil and gas firms behave ethically abroad? Liberal John McKay’s private member’s bill to hold companies to a higher standard overseas was shot down in a vote in the House of Commons on Wednesday, thanks to only tepid support from McKay’s caucus colleagues. Thirteen Liberals, including Ignatieff, (who has voiced “reservations” about the bill for months) did not turn out to support it. That sealed its fate.
It also left observers scratching their heads. After the vote, Ignatieff issued a vague statement saying he “remains committed” to bolstering corporate social responsibility by adopting voluntary reforms — agreed to in 2007 — that the Tories have failed to implement fully. Industry critics, however, contend that voluntary reforms are not sufficient to prevent abuses.

Where does Iffy really stand on anything?  I think he's trying out dither Mr. Dithers, former PM Paul Martin.

So what does that tell you?  The Liberal cheerleaders are clearly frustrated.  That can't be good for Iffy. 
They had touted him as a savior of the Liberals. He was so intelligent. . He would bring Liberals back to where they so rightly belong, at the public trough.  He'd beat the crap out PM Harper.  He's not doing that. Iffy is just not making a hit with the public even after the Liberal Express Magical Bus tour and now with the open mike stuff. There is no Iffymania with all their help conjuring up all those faux scandals on the Conservatives, Iffy is not making any head way. Every time Iffy makes these stupid moves, the more Canadians see that he's not what the media had touted him to be. It's making his cheerleaders lose their credibility and look foolish even though I think they lost their credibility years ago. 

 The libluving media are singing the blues these days and if you are  a Liberal politician you don't want to disappoint your them, they can turn on you.  Their patience only lasts so long.

Rosie DiManno: Cry Me A River, Omar!

 Obviously one of the more reasonable columnists from the Toronto Star, Rosie DiManno has not much sympathy for Omar Khadr.

Omar Khadr would have been a different person with a different father.
So what? So would we all.
There’s no retroactive mercy for felons who’ve grown up with lousy parents, in deranged households, taught wickedly in the ways of the world. That defence doesn’t work for child molesters, rapists and serial killers, many of whom were subjected to horrific mental and physical abuse, scars that never fade.
I see no reason why it should be asserted as an absolving excuse for the crimes to which Khadr has now admitted — because he had the misfortune of being born into an Al Qaeda family.

She goes on to dispel some of  those excuses that the left make for "poor little Omar."   Why anyone would see Omar as an innocent little babe is beyond me especially now when he has confessed to his crimes and feels happy about killing the US soldier whenever he thinks about it. He has absolutely no remorse. That little twerp wouldn't have hesitated if it would have been a Canadian medic instead of an American. He would have thrown that grenade regardless.  How would have the left reacted?  Probably not much different.  That is sad, really sad.  In fact whether left realizes it or not, it's down right dangerous. If you think about it, they tend to coddle and protect terrorists more than innocent citizens and that folks is scary.

Kudos to Rosie DiManno, she  has it spot on:  "Cry me a river, Omar!"

The Toronto Star Must Be in Mourning

 First of all I would like to express my congratulations to the new mayor elect of Toronto. Toronto Star has had a couple of dark days since  the election of an outspoken conservative as the new mayor for the city of Toronto. As Kelly MacParland so eloquently expresses, the Star's man, Smitherman had lost so badly and the Star had woken the next morning to a dark day when they reluctantly  had to declare that Rob Ford was the new mayor, the man they worked so hard to demonize and smear.  Oh that must have been so hard to do.

Monday was a dark day for George Smitherman, who lost badly in his bid to become Toronto mayor. The next day was even darker -- for the liberal Toronto Star, which had become an unapologetic pamphleteer for Smitherman in the weeks leading to the election. On Tuesday, it had to sheepishly report how badly its own propaganda had failed.
In the unhappy recesses of Star headquarters, perplexed editors were forced to accept that the unthinkable had happened: Rob Ford had been elected mayor. The voters of Toronto, who exist in the Star's imagination as a cheerful, "progressive," multicultural group of bicycle-loving, environmentally aware supporters of mushy Canadian liberalism, had cast their votes overwhelming for a man whom Star columnists had smeared as a neanderthal.

Then Kelly calls out the two most rabid Star columnists for their attacks on Ford.  First Heather Mallick with her usual.

 Having decided that personal attacks were fair game, the Star unloaded columnist Heather Mallick on Ford. Here's what she had to say:

"Voting for Ford is like sleeping with someone to get revenge on your spouse. It seems like a good idea at closing time, which is what an election is. Last call, and you neck down your last shot of good cold vodka. 'Sure, whatever,' is what you say to everything said to you. 'I hate streetcars too!' And you leave the lounge of the Empire Hotel on the arm of some big guy. It is Oct. 26, the day after the election, and you wake in a hard, unfamiliar bed. Your eyeballs are congealed chip fat and your contact lenses have gone crispy. Your liver is en route somewhere. You appear to be missing a tooth. And there's something in bed next to you. It is the sweaty, beer-smelling oik from the bar last night."
Poor Heather must have been scraping off the chip fat with both hands Tuesday. Not only is last night's oik in her bed, but the Viagra is just kicking in.

The reaction from Mallick after the election was well expected.

Then MacParland calls out James Travers for his attacks.

Then there was Star columnist James Travers who warned that "Sudden swings that sweep away the status quo are nothing new. But as World War II reminds, the results are often catastrophic." Toronto voters will no doubt wish they'd listened to Travers if Ford starts sending tanks into Brampton and Pickering.

Then this zinger from MacParland

.Evidently not. Ford didn't just win, he overwhelmed the opposition. The paper couldn't even score a victory out in deepest suburbia, where Mississauga's mayor-for-life, 89-year-old Hazel McCallion, was returned with 75% of the vote and spent election night denouncing the Star to anyone who would listen.

Hazel McCallion and Rob Ford, together. Lord knows what image that raises in Heather Mallick's imagination.

No doubt it must be a stunning defeat for the Star. They hate anything conservative and the new mayor, a conservative  campaigned on conservative  values and they are not supposed to resonate with Torontonians. 
This just simply could not happen, after all, Toronto is supposed to be a bastion of left wing latte sipping liberals. They had worked so hard to prevent this man from winning the Mayors chair but was in the end unsuccessful.  This right wing neanderthal was not supposed to win according to the Star. 
Maybe Torontonians are starting to wake from their slumber. Who knows but  let's hope this carries on to the provincial and federal scene.  Way to go Toronto voters! 

Quebec's Tea Party Movement

Quebec's new grassroots right wing small c-conservative tea party like movement was officially launched on the weekend.  The Quebec Freedom Network conference was a sell out weeks ago which is good news. Maxime Bernier Conservative MP from Beauce spoke saying that people in Quebec are fed up with big government.

"For 50 years we have had a big, fat interventionist government in Quebec at the provincial level, and I think people are fed up with that," Maxime Bernier, Conservative MP for Beauce and a speaker at today's event, said in an interview. "They want to have more freedom through less government." Questioning the sustainability of the once sacrosanct "Quebec model," with its generous business subsidies and extensive social services, has become more common. But even the most vocal critics of the status quo recognize that any substantial change is going to take time.

It's a good start at  for Quebec. It remains to be seen whether or not it will be a lasting thing seeing that Quebecer's are pretty fickle. I hope it  will be lasting and that it will spread like wildfire across the country with the public getting fed up with big intrusive government at all levels, speaking out and demanding change.  Look what influence the Tea Party movement in the US is having.  They have been a big influence in the midterm election cycle and are about to elect quite a few tea party candidates to Congress in about 8 days from now. 
We shall wait and see what happens  but I think such a movement can have impact here as well but it's up to us the grassroots.  Watching what's going on in Quebec will be interesting in the coming months, if change can happen there, it can happen anywhere in Canada and  it has to start somewhere.
 

.

Let's Be More Like Britain

We have a $55.6 billion deficit on our hands because of the  stimulus spending during the recession to so call stimulate our economy even though I doubt very much that the stimulus has helped that much to our  recovery.

Now the fight will be on to find solutions to slaying the deficit between the Conservatives and the Libs. The Conservatives have already indicated the corporate tax cuts which is to take affect in January will go ahead. That will leave more money in the  companies' coffers to invest in more capital, hire more employees etc.

The Libs on the other hand want to cancel the corporate tax cuts in order to pay for their social programs like their home care plan. which would be a job killer.  Other than that the deficit reduction plans from both parties are much alike   So it's basically tax and spend Liberals.  There are not very bold intiatives, no big spending cuts, or reduction of the size of government  from either party.  We need to further, much further to slash that deficit and pay down the debt than what either party are proposing.

So why don't we take a page out the the British deficit reduction book?  They are much bolder in their plan.  They plan to slash spending and raise the retirement age from 65 to 66yrs.
They are reducing the size of government by cutting upwards of 490,000 public servants positions over the next four years.

LONDON - Britain said on Wednesday it would cut half a million public sector jobs, raise the retirement age and slash the welfare state as part of the biggest spending cuts in a generation.

This is what we should be doing.  Yeah, some wouldn't like it, it would hurt for a while but it would be good for the country in the long run because a smaller government saves the taxpayer a bundle leaving more money in our pockets.   More money in our pockets leaves us to spend, invest and innovate.  Business in the private sector with more money creates jobs.  That in turn brings in more government revenue believe it or not. t's just good for everyone.

BTW. Has anyone ever heard of the forgotten depression of 1920?  Didn't think so. This is how the US got out of that one very quickly and back into prosperity.

The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover — falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics — urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.
Instead of "fiscal stimulus," Harding cut the government’s budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding’s approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserve’s activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, "Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction."2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.

I encourage you to take the time to watch this video.  It's over 40 minutes long but very informative.  It tells the story of the forgotten 1920's depression.

So we  should have learned something from all of this by now.  Have we? I don't know but what all this has proven  is that big government spending and socialism doesn't work. The bills eventually come due and have to be paid.  Only common sense, true conservatism, personal freedom and responsibility.  The ability to create and invent, and the freedom for business to make a profit. That is what works!

So let's try true conservatism for a change. Let's live within our means. Cut spending, aggressively cut taxes, reduce the size of government, allow for personal freedom and responsiblity and that will spark inovation and creativity then prosperity will come back. It's just as simple as government getting out of the way.

The British  train is finally on the right track. The Canadian train needs catch up and  get on that track before we become a train wreck.  It's just as simple as government getting out of the way.  Not just the federal government but governments at all levels must take the same course.  What are we waiting for?   Let's be more like Britain!