Thursday, March 29, 2007

When to Fire the Front Page Editor

Just a neat quick observation.
 
The morning after the Quebec election this week, the Globe and Mail ran a huge above the fold headline about the results. The National Post, (perhaps distracted from their jobs by round the clock coverage of the Sluts and Vermin trial in Chicago), ran a full color full half page headline and photo of the sit down between Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley.
 
I couldn't find a Globe and Mail to buy anywhere at lunchtime. National Posts were everywhere.
 
I know the Ireland thing is big international news and historic and blah blah blah. But come on. This is Canada. A Quebec minority for the first time in 100 years. The explosive growth of a party that previously had 5 seats. A Premier that came within a hairs breadth of losing his seat. Direct Implications for the timing of a Federal election and prospects for the sitting Prime Minister. 
 
And you didn't LEAD with it? 
 
The mind boggles.
 
------------------------------
 
In Other News
 
I'm in Ottawa this weekend and will be out with friends on Saturday night after 8:00 at the Standard Luxury Tavern at 360 Elgin. Feel free to drop by and say hi if you are so inclined. 
 
 
 
 

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Popular Myths

This very interesting link has nothing to do with politics and policy whatsoever.
 
Except for this:
 
How many of these myths did you ever, at any point in your life, take as being gospel truth?
 
Imagine how many things we STILL take as gospel truth...even though they are myths. I'm just sayin'.  

Open Letter to those who wish to have my vote for Law Society of Upper Canada Bencher

Dear Candidate for Bencher, (The Council of Lawyers that runs the Law Society)
 
I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your letter asking me to support you for Bencher.
 
I don't practice law. I do policy. Some might suggest that the fact that I help to write and interpret laws means I do practice law every day, but in Ontario anyway, my job isn't technically practicing law. As a result I don't have to pay full fees and insurance to the Law Society of Upper Canada. Instead I pay half fees. I thank you for this small consideration.   However...
 
...That half fee is currently eighty three dollars a month. I would consider resigning from the Law Society but you appear to have me in a bind. If I leave the law society and later want to re-join the Law Society will penalise me for leaving and re-joining by making me pay all the unpaid fees for the months of the two relevant years: the year I left and the year I came back. Since I may very well end up practicing law again - for example by getting a legal job here at the OPS later, I keep up my membership.  Essentially though I am paying $1000 a year for next to nothing. As a former boss of mine - who left the law society - said. "Why am I paying them money? Just so I can call myself a barrister and solicitor?" My understanding is that the equivalent fee in manitoba is $120 per year.  In BC the fee is $300 per year.  In Alberta the fee is $160 per year.
 
In addition, because I don't pay insurance I am precluded even from giving pro bono legal advice to friends or from volunteering at a legal aid clinic. There is no reasonable casual practitioner insurance scheme, for example, for people who only work pro bono in off hours or who bill a ridiculously small number of hours.
 
And now you want my vote.  One of you just sent me an email moaning about how voter turnout for Bencher elections has dropped to 37% of members. But do I get any promises from you? Any enticements to vote? So far I haven't received a single thing that comes close.
 
If you want my vote - and maybe the votes of thousands of other non-practicing lawyers - send me an email telling me that you will cut my fees. A placeholder fee in line with the other provinces seems eminently reasonable to me. Or promise to make it so I can quit and rejoin more easily. Or make it so that some semblance of insurance is included in my fee.  Or tie my fee to services I will use.
 
In any event, Promise me SOMETHING.
 
I have enough things to vote for already without focussing on something that doesn't seem to matter and for people who clearly couldn't give a hoot about me or my wallet.
 
Respectfully,
 
A.D. Cory MacDonald
Member
Law Society of Upper Canada
 
 

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Quebec

I'm quite busy at work right now so I can't pontificate at length this minute. But I guess I'll write this:
 
Quebec Election: Wowsers.
 
Just so you know I'm paying attention. ;-)

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

I'll say it again

2008 is the Youtube Presidential Election.

err...

you know... unless the government falls immediately because of the clean air act...

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

More on the budget and Canadian politics proper for once.

My brother mentioned to me a little while ago that he was patiently waiting for some actual Canadian politics on this blog. Now is a good a time as any since on second consideration I do have one or two other things to say about the House of Commons political situation.
 
It took me a little while to get my head around this budget and what it meant. Maybe I'm slow. But like lots of you I was waiting for the big ELECTION BUDGET!!!!!  But it didn't seem to come. I know this is being called the everybody gets a cookie budget. But there was absolutely no cookie in it for me. I have gotten used to cookies over the last few years. In every budget I either personally benefitted or some aspect of my ideology (cut my taxes. Cut the debt Cut my taxes. Cut the debt) got pandered to. This time I didnt get pandered to. And no surprise. I don't speak French and don't live in Quebec.  What I realised is that this clearly ISN'T the election budget. This is the Bloc Support budget.
 
I know some of you are saying "d'uh Cory. Of course" right now. But up until the last minute all the pundits I saw were viewing this through that other prism. The one with the spring election.  But since we now know that this was a budget designed not to increase power (through the acquisition of a majority government) but rather to extend power. Where does that leave us?
 
Well - I don't know.
 
The Tories would have ideally liked, I think, to have the conditions in place to call an election so that they could give us a bunch of new priorities, get a majority and have a mandate to implement those changes. But now what? They've been so damned efficient that most of their big priorities have been put in place. They've won back as much of the environmental vote as can be expected, and they have "fixed the fiscal imbalance".  So they basically don't have much mandate to do anything else - at least as far as I can see.
 
This situation is no problem for Liberals. Enough Canadians love the Liberals enough that Canadians will follow them. But not so the Tories. By and large voters don't trust the Tories. So they demand that the Tories follow them. Which is why you are seeing this huge rush to the left by the Tories. Basically the Tories can stay in power, say Canadians, as long as they act like Liberals. If they try to go off on their own with no mandate Canadians will get spooked.
 
But at what point do the Tories actually get to govern? Actually get to put in place some more policies that they would like to see? To actually move the country in a direction they imagined in the halcyon days of the Reform party conferences of yesteryear? I don't know. But I bet that will be the grumbling in Caucus next week behind closed doors. I expect Harper will get an earful. They can't have a majority AND they are throwing money around like this? Well well well. 
 
On the other side, how frustrated right wing commentators seems to be that the Tories aren't playing their appointed role. This is how it is supposed to work. The Liberals are the natural governing party. The tories are the clean up crew. The Liberals are supposed to throw money around, keep the country together and by and large keep this Canada thing working. When voters get bored with seeing the same faces on the news they are supposed to throw the bums out and put tories in. THEN THE TORIES ARE SUPPOSED TO FALL ON THEIR NOBLE SWORD by making the rough and tough decisions. Get thrown out for making these necessary but unpopular choices and the cycle begins again. Rinse and repeat.
 
Stephen Harper doesn't want to play that game. He may not want to be a Liberal but he REALLY doesn't want to be a chump. Let the Liberals clean up HIS mess, I bet he thinks at night. Yes, I'd like to run the country one way but Canadians won't let me. Pundits want me to be a good little tory but the end result of that will be the return of the natural governing party. So screw this. Let's flip the script and see what happens. 
 
So when Andrew Coyne rants today he is right as rain but missing the forest for the trees. Stephen Harper doesn't want the Conservatives to be the stick you beat the Liberals with. Oh no. His plans are grander. 
 
But where does that leave us? Since this is now defined as a very political government instead of a truly policy minded government. What will they have in store for us in the next 365 days? And will it be decent policy AT ALL? To be honest, from a policy perspective I'm nervous. Lots of the five priorities are more flash than substance and now he doesn't even have those. So I'll be fascinated to see what his next move is because at the moment I have no idea what he wants to do with the time he just bought himself.
 
One last thing - policy commentators are 100% wrong when they say there aren't any tax cut toys available in the future budgets. They'll be there along with all the really exciting toys in the REAL pre-election budget. Which is probably this time next year.
 
 
 
 

Booom.

Andrew Coyne. His head explode.

Oh...And Here's Where They Stand At The Moment To Win The Whole Enchilada

 

Intrade

Candidate

Party

Price

Change

Hillary Clinton

D

24.30

+0.000

Rudy Giuliani

R

21.60

+0.000

Barack Obama

D

18.00

+0.000

John McCain

R

13.50

+0.000

Mitt Romney

R

7.80

+0.000

Al Gore

D

7.10

+0.000

John Edwards

D

6.50

+0.000

George Allen

R

0.60

+0.000

Mark Warner

D

0.50

+0.000

 

When to Shut Up

When bad press coverage might tilt a delicate balance and therefore cost your husband many many years in prison it is best not to call the press covering you (rather sympathetically I might add) sluts and vermin. Especially when it allows that same press to gleefully point out that you have something of a reputation as both a slut and a vermin yourself.
 
Honestly. The mind boggles.

More on political betting...

...from Slate Magazine. Are they sneaking peaks at my blog? Damn them!

We had ourselves a budget

...and I don't want to talk about it.
 
Because all the important stuff to talk about (at least to me) involves what this budget says about Quebec's place in the Federation. And I do "our federation stuff" for a living. Maybe I'll think harder and chat with my boss and figure out some appropriate parameters.
 
I guess I could say this though - it is the deepest cruelty to put a $4000 tax on gas guzzling vehicles in Canada. Why? Because they are the big vehicles that don't get stuck in snowdrifts.
 
Canada getting upset over global warming. Good lord. We are a country of saints. I'm going to think up a reason to start asking people at the equator to start wearing wool sweaters and see how they react.
 
I nominate Canada for the Nobel Peace prize. Or the Global Sucker award.
 
Yes. All of us. Gimme.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Friday, March 16, 2007

Amazing New Technology: Email Address

As you can tell, I've put a new email address onto the blog. If you feel like commenting privately - or even if you just don't want to struggle with bloggers comment box - now you have another way.
 
CIP

Dismissive Thrust meet Eye Rolling Parry

Kate at Small Dead Animals writes with respect to coverage of the Conrad Black Trial:
 
"At the very least, I do think there are editors who would do well to check whether their TV cameras are capturing real news, or just another reflection in the Canadian media fish bowl."
 
My response in comments:
 
Conrad Black is news to us. Real news. Not a media fishbowl. I will buy a paper that covers this trial. The man is not a big deal in the US but he is a bona fide huge deal here at home. He started a second national newspaper. His compatriots have revitalised MacLeans. He battled the Prime Minister over the peerage issue. And he has been an aggressive and interesting commentator on numerous domestic and international political issues. His business decisions - acquisitions or wind ups - have directly affected many canadian lives and communities. He is our Donald Trump. He is our Citizen Kane. The idea that the Conrad Black trial is only news because he is in the newspaper business and is therefore of interest primarily to those in that business is, quite simply, facile.
 
Comments welcome as always.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Hey Readers

Was one of you flying over the South Atlantic near Nigeria a few days ago while web surfing? I got a few blog hits from the middle of the ocean!




Ahem...

More sacrilege. You'd almost think this whole giant debate wasn't actually over. ;-)

Re: the Post Below

... Here's the transcript.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

It is being reported that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed...k, wait a sec, I need to post his obligatory bedhead picture...
 
 
There. That's better. He's oh so pretty.   Anyway...he has confessed to being the mastermind behind 9/11. This has led to me reading an endless bunch of really annoying posts on blogs and messageboards stating "I thought Osama Bin Laden" was the mastermind? haha. Bush lies. bla bla bla.   You know, that kind of childish crap.  So OK... I'm going to break this down into language that all North Americans can actually understand: 
 
If 9/11 was a movie, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the Director. Osama Bin Laden was the studio chief that greenlit the picture and provided the financing. 
 
Clearer now? Sorry to be a dick about it but sometimes us gadfly types can accidently sneer and smirk ourselves into being utter twits. 
--------------------------------------------------------
 
Oh. While I'm here:  for those of you that still think 9/11 was an inside job done by an administration that couldn't even manage to plant some WMDs in Iraq, some head clearing resources: 
 
 I like this link for giving it a good cheeky response: http://www.sawyerhome.net/whatilearned.html . Just so set the right tone, ya know.
 
 
 
 
Popular Mechanics did this
but the konspiracy kids reject it as yellow journalism by a hearst owned paper.
 
This google search will lead youto even more serious resources.
 
 
Happy Thursday,
 
CIP
 
 

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Slamming the Spammers

 
I read today on Jason Cherniak's blog that amongst other announcements Stephane Dion is promising an anti-spam law. . Hey Liberals. Hey Tories. Hey anyone in the States. Hey anyone reading this anywhere: I have your anti-spam law.
 
Prosecute any person or company who distributes pornographic materials to any email address owned by any person under the age of 18. Be sure to insert a reverse onus. Before pornography can be sent to an email address the owner of that email address must prove to the distributing company that the recipient is over the age of majority or the distributing company is held responsible should that email address prove to be under the ownership of a minor.  Some attempts at legislation like this have been introduced in the past, but nothing with the reverse onus I am speaking of.  What got through congress was a bill that insisted that spam be labeled [sexually explicit].  Sure. that's like labelling a box of candy with a label that says HEY! FREE CANDY! AND MOM'S NOT GONNA SEE YA EAT IT!
 
Yes. I know my idea is not perfect. Yes, I know spammers use anonymous remailers. Yes I know about overseas harbours. That's nice.  Work out the details yourselves. In the meantime - remind me why you elected officials are letting these people send porn to our children again? Why are we letting this activity continue? Google spam filters stop spam from getting in our faces, but they don't stop the snooping eyes of small and innately curious. How would you react to someone standing outside your junior high school ripping pages out of Hustler and thrusting them at your ten year old? Not happily I expect.   So if you want to really slam the spammers, I just gave you your opening. and even if they switch to other products and we still get spam, the point remains.  
 
You're welcome. Now get on it.
 
 

Cicero the Prescient. Cicero for...President?

Last week I was talking politics with some colleagues from work - telling them how I thought the 2008 Presidential Election would go down and how I thought it was a bad idea to rule out a win by second tier or late entrants. One reason I cited strongly was my belief that 2008 would be the first Presidential Youtube election. In short, there is a certain randomness added to this election because any gaffe said on the campaign trail or any policy shift from previous campaigns, can end up on Youtube. Today's Daily Telegraph makes the same point. Of course we all know this isn't the first time this has happened. George Allen has already been felled by it. One thing we can know for sure - he won't be the last.

While most of this Youtube development is incredibly positive and will help to keep politicians accountable, there is also a fairly strong negative. No one can be their best selves every minute of every day. In this election either John McCain or Hillary Clinton could lose the election simply for pulling their wedgied underwear out of their ass on the way from a car to a door. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. Of course we could have a whole other discussion about what kind on idiot you must be to not vote for someone because of something like that... or for an ill timed high pitched crescendo scream. But I wouldn't want to say uncharitable things about the American electorate...

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

and check this one out too...

 
www.RealClimate.org is a site that is well worth checking out. It is a pro-"humans cause climate change" site that purports to be very careful with the science and to avoid buying in to the rhetoric. Do they do an actual good job of this? I have no idea because it is, quite simply, over my head. But it appears to be the best resource available. So there you go. :)

Counterpoint: British Resources Savaging the Great Global Warming Swindle

 
 
 
Back and forth I go. Back and forth I go. I feel like I'm back on the swing set in grade three. Whee!

I'm really not trying to turn this into a climate change blog. Honest.

...But for my little audience, a couple of interesting links.

Random Stuff

Two stories of random interest.
Also - one of my friends asked me what I thought of Stephane Dion lately since people are already writing his obituary. My answer - for better or worse - is that I think he's holding his powder. Just like a guy named Steve did before the last election. That doesn't mean I'm predicting a Liberal win or anything crazy like that. I just mean that a necessary corollary of the powder holding strategy is a short term drop in the polls. I still favor the Tories (but thats colored at least in part because I want them to win this next one. Frankly I'd love a Stephen Harper majority. I want to see what he would do with it) but in any case, this one ain't over by a long shot.
 
 

Citizen Black + Interpretive Dancers = Vindication?

Check this out:

This morning on the bus, I find the following newslet in this morning's Metro

CHICAGO -- When Conrad Black sits before the jury that will decide his fate on fraud charges, observers say his lawyers likely want him facing artists, writers and others who "see nuance," rather than blue-collar workers with a firm faith in the chain of command. Prosecutors will be looking for "law-and-order, follow-the-rules type\ s who also believe in chain of command and that the buck stops at the top." (Here's a link to a longer version I found later in the London Free Press)

I almost laughed out loud in my seat. I've been a proponent of the belief that Conrad Black has been getting a raw deal for some time now. But if this is his defence teams jury strategy then it may be about to get rawer (yep, I know that it isn't a word. thanks.) Conrad Black is a bete noir to the left. Artists and writers are almost uniformly leftist. They have absolutely no history of seeing nuance when thinking about class struggle and rich grumpy looking old men who remind them of robber baron villains and trophy wives who've been recently painted as Imelda Marcos lite.

And who said blue collar people don't see nuance? There are an AWFUL LOT of blue collar people out there and an AWFUL LOT of them have no problem seeing nuance. Maybe these lawyers should meet some.

Finally, WWHD gentlemen. What Would Howard Roarke Do? I don't call myself a Randian anymore (I guess I'm a lawyer who can't help seeing nuances) but there is a scene near the end of The Fountainhead that might prove instructive.

Alright - I'm being a little cheeky with that last part - but suffice it to say, this jury strategy - as articulated in the press - seems dodgy. Looking for people who see nuance is quite wise - but an attempt to find nuanced people based on their profession and with no mind to their ideological prejudices could easily backfire. It is so dodgy in fact, that I doubt that his incredibly competent and well remunerated team has such a simple minded strategy. Methinks the observers may be moderately off base.

But hey - what do I know? That Rona Ambrose decision of the PM seems to have turned out just fine for him - contrary to what I would have had you believe . She's snug as a bug in a rug and quiet as a church mouse (and as comfortable as a folksy old cliche?).

Friday, March 9, 2007

Social Networking

Emily Yoffe from Slate tries out the virtues of Facebook as a 50 year old. Is social networking for all ages? Personally I'm very impressed with Facebook. It is not a toy. It is a utility. Basically it isn't your stereo, it's your fax.  It is a series of interlocking connections linked to your email that lets people stay in touch instead of drifting apart. Lots of silly fun at first. Then just very very useful.   Man, I love the Internet. I LOOOOOOVE IT.

Thursday, March 8, 2007

Ironic isn't it?

All hail Canada where up is down, night is day and left is right!
 
Our left wing major party defeated our deficits and chopped our taxes. And I can't open a newspaper without seeing our right wing party curing us of global warming .
 
Don't ever vote NDP folks. We might invade the USA while simultaneously banning all taxation.

Quebec ElectioMffffph Mfffffph!!

Which is my way of saying that I would looooooooove to rant, rave muse and comment about the fascinating Quebec election, sovereignty, partition and Jean Charest's interesting remarks however in my job I work closely with the other provinces and am most reticent to expound on such issues at present. Get me drunk at the pub some time. Don't try to guess at my opinions either. Heck even I am not sure exactly what they are yet, so you certainly don't.
 
 
 

Tuesday, March 6, 2007

Cell Phone Number Portability in Canada. Finally.

This is just a public service announcement. As of March 14, 2007 you will be able to keep your phone number when switching mobile service providers  in Canada. About bloody time. This should lead to increased competition and better prices. So ummm... don't sign any long term cell phone contracts in the next week.