Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Fantasy Leadership

A reader writes in with the following suggestion:

I think you should host a thread on people's fantasy liberal leaders. Dead or alive, fictional or real, canadian or convince-to-immigrate. I've had this chat with some of my friends and heard some good responses. After all, there's no reason the LPC shouldn't be able to attract anyone in the real-live-canadian category (even if you've only just returned...). I've heard Gretz's name mentioned, and with his team's poor showing he may be up for a career change. And the recent gambling scandal (and his emphatic denials) suggest he may have the sand for politics.


I'll toss in a few other names to get the ball rolling:

Jack Bauer
Pros: He's used to making quick decisions in pressure packed situations. No one could question our commitment to the war on terror. Since he's played by Kiefer, who is Tommy Douglas' grandson, he'd be very appealing to NDP voters.
Cons: He supports the use of torture and has been out of the country for long time. Surely that would exclude him from Liberal leadership, n'est-ce-pas?

Ralph Klein
Pros: Has done a great job at making Stephen Harper's life as miserable as possible over the years. Could lead to an Alberta breakthrough for Liberals (of 2 or 3 seats - let's be realistic).
Cons: He's a Conservative. But hey, who in this race isn't?
Everyone in Ontario hates him. Not that that's stopping Bob Rae...

Jesus Christ
Pros: Last JC won 3 majorities.
Ability to perform miracles gives us a fighting chance in Calgary.
Speaks in tongues so he should know French.
Difficult to run an attack ad against him.
Cons: Like Paul Martin, seems to be living in his father's shadow and has been known to wander aimlessly for 40 days at a time.


So send in your suggestions and post them in the comments section bellow. The field to date is rather uninspiring, so hopefully we can find a hidden gem out there.

60 Comments:

  • JC as a Liberal?

    The concept is so offensive, I'm off to burn down the Polish consulate.

    By Blogger Chuckercanuck, at 1:00 PM  

  • I thought Iggy was our dream candidate? Oh, wait...that's only in his own mind.

    By Anonymous Steve, at 1:00 PM  

  • No mention of JC's radical Christian religious agenda?

    You're slipping, CG.

    By Anonymous john g, at 1:17 PM  

  • Do you ever get a reply to any of your letters or Emails to liberal MPs?

    Conservative MPs have actually answered my Emailed questions.
    Noteably on the topic of Whistle Blower law bill C-11.

    The reason I ask is that liberals have the most expert take on who would make the best new leader.

    Your best choice suggestion for the new leader could come from an MP or two, so long as your source remains confidential.

    Mps are people too. They may send you inside information simply on the basis of promoting their prefernce.

    It could come as an anonymouse comment to the blogsite.

    Email is so easy. If I was running a site as popular as Calgary Grit, then this is a request worth making. TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 1:25 PM  

  • Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.

    (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6901354&postID=114110767991372179)

    By Blogger Keegan, at 2:09 PM  

  • Paul Wells.

    Pros: Nationally known, clear thinker, has interesting ideas on education and economy. Bilingual. Plus, he clearly knows how to run an election better than last Liberal leader, or anyone else, for that matter. Would also speak the language of other media elites.

    Cons: None to speak of. There has clearly never been a difficulty translating political punditry into real governance.

    By Blogger Barrelman, at 2:24 PM  

  • David McGuinty

    PROS: Can ask Dalton for advice at any time.

    CONS: Might place Ontario's interests ahead of everyone else's.

    By Blogger Draft Winston Chan, at 2:33 PM  

  • I like your Jack Bauer idea. While the whole torture thing may be an issue, he does look awfully cool while torturing people. Even my wife pumps her fist in the air when he gets a terrorist to talk by beating them or pretending to kill their family. The only downside is that he would need a one year break after being Prime Minister for 24 hours.

    Great blog by the way.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:38 PM  

  • Stewie Griffen!!! Very well educated for a 2 year old...eats guys like Jack Bauer for lunch!!!
    Would pay anything to see him say that first sentance after winning the election..."victory is mine"

    By Anonymous gwilliam, at 2:49 PM  

  • another JC, Jason Cherniak!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:05 PM  

  • JC would be unacceptable.

    He is not a friend of Isreal.

    He associates with known prostitutes and has a wierd foot-washing fetish.

    Furthermore, he has been known to provide medical treatment outside of the publicly funded system. I am not sure that Ujaal would approve.

    By Blogger A Canadian Publius, at 3:05 PM  

  • Pierre Trudeau

    Pros: National Icon. Bilingual. Why settle for a candidate that is said to be Trudeau-esque, when you can have Trudeau himself?

    Cons: The whole NEP thing might make it difficult to break through in Alberta.

    By Blogger robedger, at 3:08 PM  

  • Mohammed

    Pros...

    Ability to instill almost awe inspiring devotion in his followers
    If you don't follow him, he kill you.
    He believes in a conservative economy
    He believes that everyone is equal, as long as they are Islamic.
    He'd wrap up the Islamic vote.
    We wouldn't have to worry about anyone burning down our embassies.
    He'd get us even better dollars for our oil.
    He has climbed a mount, so he's got focus.
    He strongly believes in reading, as long as its the Koran.
    He's for free speech, as long as an Imam told you it was okay to say.
    Pray time mean a couple of coffee breaks for sure everyday.

    Cons

    He likes his women barefoot in the winter and preggers in the summer.
    He is an abolishinest. No beer for you... only goats milk.
    He will kill you even if you do follow him.
    He won't let you eat the other "white meat".
    He is really sensitive to critic's... especially cartoonists.
    If you miss prayers... kiss paradise goodbye.
    He likes using Children as bombs.

    By Blogger Joe Calgary, at 3:16 PM  

  • Sadly Jesus could never win a seat in Alberta. The dude is just too much of a liberal.

    That whole thing about him kick money changers out of the temples? What is he some kind of pinko commie?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:57 PM  

  • I nominate the Canadian Tire Man.

    Pros:

    1. Impeccable business credentials, having built a coast-to-coast empire.
    2. Loved and loathed by all,often simultaneously -- oddly reminiscent of the reaction engendered by Trudeau.
    3. Staff discount on Mastercraft parts -- just what the military and our social programs need.


    Cons:

    1. "More than just tires" won't cut it as an election slogan.
    2. Being only seen on fake money has tagged him with a two-dimensional image.
    3. Even though he's got tires, he might not get enough traction.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:44 PM  

  • Dr. Phil

    Pros: Could be a changing day for Canada. No problem that he can't solve in an hour (including commercial breaks). Folksy demeanor will appeal to Alberta voters. Is staunchly against the break up of marriage, and presumably countries.

    Cons: Looks like a fat Jack Layton.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:54 PM  

  • Don Cherry.

    Pro: The Libs would sweep rural Alberta.

    Con: They'd lose pretty much everywhere else.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:42 PM  

  • The Libs would sweep all of rural Canada, and be shut out in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver*. Wait....

    *I don't really think urban Canada ends at those three.

    By Blogger matt, at 6:51 PM  

  • Joe Volpe!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:58 PM  

  • RICHARD DIAMOND!


    RICHARD DIAMOND!


    RICHARD DIAMOND!

    RICHARD DIAMOND!
    RICHARD DIAMOND!

    RICHARD DIAMOND!


    RICHARD DIAMOND!
    RICHARD DIAMOND!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:45 PM  

  • Brittney Spears

    Pros - Would make everyone finally stop talking about Belinda!
    A female prime minister could capture the women voters.
    She could also capture male voters.

    Cons - She is not that innocent

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:52 PM  

  • ROBIN HOOD

    PROS:
    - clearly in favour of wealth redistribution.
    - penchant for theft fits in nicely with party culture when in government.
    - stealing from the rich to give to the poor, instead of stealing from the poor to give to rich ad executives, is less unsightly in the eyes of the media.
    - penchant for social justice should help consolidate the 'progessive' vote.
    - in original medieval ballads, he was seen as a arrogant, headstrong rebel who was not adverse to bloodletting; which should endear him to the party elite.
    - friar tuck as de facto running mate will help sow up the religious vote.
    - WASP bonifieds could present advantages in major urban centres.

    CONS:
    - WASP bonifieds could present electoral difficulties in major urban centres.
    - friar tuck as de facto running mate could be mistaken as buzz hargrove by some; robe notwithstanding.
    - jack layton may have the pretentious mustache vote already sown up, thus nullifying its use as a wedge issue.
    - man in tights nullifies any chance of an alberta breakthrough.
    - could face a serious challenge in the leadership race from the sheriff of nottingham whose overtaxing the populous into poverty gives him a leg up amongst the party elite.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:55 PM  

  • Hahahaha! The bit on JC totally made me laugh! You too, A Canadian Publius!

    By Anonymous Janet, at 9:52 PM  

  • I think that the post by Joe Calgary is ridiculous. I know that he is making a joke, and I understand that. But please have your facts right especially when speaking about the religion. This shows that you may need to educate yourself a bit more before speaking about this topic. You are correct when you speak about missing prayers, and things like that. But I think it is absolutely anti- Islamic and very racist most of the comments you posted there especially about if you don;t follow him he'll kill you. That is absolutely false. Muhammad preached coexistence long before it ws practiced in other countries. Look at the many Arab countries today such as Syria and Egypt where there are atleast 15 million Christians combined living in both those countries because of the coexistence that Muhammad preaced. Regarding using children as bombs that is absoluely ridiculous. I urge you to read a biography of the Prophet and see his compassion before making any stereotypes. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad if you want to actually learn more about him. Or you can check a book that was written about the most influential persons in history written by Michael H. Hart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100 and guess who topped the list. I urge you to research and learn before writing. For one to succeed he/she must educate themselves.
    Thank you

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:28 PM  

  • Joey Shithead, aka Joe Keithley.

    Joey is best known as leader of Canada’s most influential punk band D.O.A. and as the Canadian godfather of punk. He co-founded Sudden Death Records.

    His memoirs? "I, Shithead"

    He also ran as a Green Party candidate in BC.

    Advantages:

    1. He's already called a shithead. He can take it, unlike a certain thin-skinned PM.

    2. Already knows correct use of Inuit statues.

    3. Grab assailant, knock down. Kick with Doc Martens. Who needs security?

    4. Budget shoes: Doc Martens.

    5. New dress code for House. Black t-shirt and old jeans. Doc Martens.

    6. Has platform that advocates increased funding to education and long-term health care, the decriminalization of marijuana, an end to big-box shopping-mall developments and tax penalties for corporate polluters.

    7. His new riff of O Canada will run no more than 30 seconds.

    8. Leader's Debate: Guitar Deathmatch Edition.

    9. Scott Feschuk finally realizes his dream of becoming a roadie.

    10. "Kicking Ass In Canadian Politics"? Joey don't kick, HE STOMPS.

    Best reason: Canada's Answer to Chuck Norris.

    By Blogger Michael, at 12:40 AM  

  • LPC = Totalitarianism

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:30 AM  

  • Tony Blair

    Pros:
    Experience in running a government successfully and winning reelection.
    Conservative enough to please conservatives.
    Liberal enough to please liberals and NDPers.
    Can work with others of different viewpoints.
    Long-term strategic thinker.

    Cons:
    Sent troops to Iraq.
    Is GWB's friend.

    By Blogger SouthernOntarioan, at 8:34 AM  

  • To Joe Calgary at 1.16, regarding Muhammad (peace be upon him).

    I would like to tell you that you are wrong.

    He strongly believes in reading, as long as its the Koran
    He was actually illiterate. So he would support a National Child Care and Early Education plan. The first verse revealed in Quran was 'Read'.

    He believes in a conservative economy
    Muslims have to donate 2.5% of yearly savings to the needy. That's on top of all taxes. That's more NDP than Liberal.

    If you don't follow him he'll kill you.
    If that was true there would be no Christians left in Spain, India, Bulgary, Romania, Austria, Serbia, Bosnia, Syria, Iraq, Iran and so on. He also emigrated himself from Mecca and allowed immigrants to ply their trade in Medina, so he would be sensitive to immigrants and recognizing foreign credentials.

    He likes using Children as bombs.
    No bombs in the 6th century and he actually forbade children under 18 to join his army (battles of Badr, Uhud, so on). As such, he would not promise to increase the Canadian army by 20,000 more troops. Also never led a naval campaign so no ice-breakers.

    He likes his women barefoot in the winter and preggers in the summer.
    Huh? He ofcourse drafted the first laws in that era giving women inheritance and legal rights, and permits abortion upto 120 days of conception (muslims believe life begins after that, not at conception). So would also be immune to abortion attacks.

    I realize you have the freedom of speech to be offensive. I don't think you were trying to make a joke, you were just letting out some racist talk.

    By Blogger mezba, at 10:01 AM  

  • This blog's favourite, Kennedy, seems to be coming around to running for the Liberal leader's position.

    Toronto Star.

    By Blogger mezba, at 11:29 AM  

  • William Shatner:

    Pro:
    -He's been to galaxies far far away
    -If he can steer the Enterprise, he can steer this country.
    -He's boldly gone where no man has gone before
    -He's got Spock as a communications director

    Con:
    -May have some baggage when it is discovered that he had an affair with a pair of green women on some far off planet.

    By Blogger Hangin to the left, at 11:49 AM  

  • The Fathers of Canada’s Deconfederation ...

    Do yourself a favour: dig out the Robert Harris painting of the 37 Fathers of Confederation. Now place before you photos of Stephen Harper and each Premier.

    These are the new Founding Fathers of Canadian Deconfederation. Some artist should start work on a painting similar to that of Harris, to record for posterity the faces of these new Fathers.

    Why? Because these men are now busily and stealthily engaged in the constructive deconfederation of Canada, under the guise of Harper’s “New Federalism” and “fiscal imbalance.”

    They are avoiding open discussion in Parliament and their respective Provincial legislatures, because they know that there would be an outcry from citizens should it become apparent – through such debate – that these men are trying to do in private rooms, that which could not survive in the light of day. They are agreeing – without mandates from their respective voters – to change the nature of our confederation in such a way as to significantly weaken the bonds that bind this country together.

    You don’t believe me? Then google fiscal imbalance harper. Read the commentaries you will find referred to there. Read Sinclair Stevens. Read Andrew Coyne.

    Listen to the modern Canadian Paul Revere’s, riding furiously to warn citizens, crying One if by open debate, two if by stealth.

    And then do your part as a citizen of Canada: Light two lamps, to signal to the body politic that their Confederation is being stolen from them by stealth.

    By Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat, at 11:57 AM  

  • http://draftdiamond.blogspot.com/


    Richard Diamond is not really a fantasy as he is real!

    But he will be a dream come true for the Liberal Party of Canada!


    Come on Bart!


    Hope on board the Diamond Express!

    We promise big things for you!

    By Blogger Diamond Fan, at 12:37 PM  

  • 'Diamond' Joe Quimby

    Pros:
    - Years of political experience
    - No really discernable ideological leanings
    - A kickass New England accent

    Cons:
    - The hookers

    By Blogger freshly_squeezed, at 12:41 PM  

  • Scott Feschuk

    Pros:
    -unlike Martin, is able to keep his message focused on a few vital priorities and pop-culture references.
    -Could win the crucial vote of pasty 20-somethings that don't get out much.
    -Would provide the newly unemployed cast of the West Wing with jobs if he ever won.

    Cons:
    -Not well liked by certain varieties of fruit, due to certain comments.
    -May have been the mole in '06.
    -His ridicule of Paul Hellyer (and OMNI readers) could force Hellyer to accelerate his one big party idea (merging the NDP and Cdn. Action Party).

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:47 PM  

  • forgot to say that Mohammed thought the world was flat.
    Didn't notice you defending the "other" prophet Jesus Christ.

    And why should we educate ourselves with a book written by someone that received "Divine Intervention" The Koran is no different than the Book of Mormon, both are fictional.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:36 PM  

  • Mezba, well said.

    To the obviously racist muslim-hating piece of human garbage, kindly do the world a favour and fuck off.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:35 PM  

  • CuriosityKilledTheCat, If you are or want to support the liberal cause, you may be wise to avoid the word stealth.

    Martin cast a spell of absolute secrecy to government secrecy staff in order to beat the freedom of information act.

    Having had security clearances myself, I learned normal terms were in the order of 10 years, 30 years, 40years, and fifty years.

    Martin imposed this application term for *LIFE*. The public is not alarmed because they are not aware of the secrets act.

    Another stealth tactic that was brilliant and fully mislead the public was the *Fear Harper* campaign.

    That will be a landmark in Canadian political history. TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 3:54 PM  

  • Typical Liberal, so quick with the accusations of racism, or whatever happens to be the "ism" of the day. Since Islam counts members of every race on the planet among it's adherents, the racist label just won't stick. Of course, if you weren't as shallow as a mud puddle, or as dumb as lint, you might have figured this out for yourself. Try religionist. I realize this isn't in the Liberal pocket guide to gratuitous slurs for your opponents, but at least it is accurate.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:02 PM  

  • Why did the Cat use the word “stealth” to describe Harper and the Premiers dismantling of Confederation? Because is fits, Tonyguitar, that’s why.

    What does stealth mean?
    “stealth (stĕlth)
    n.
    1. The act of moving, proceeding, or acting in a covert way.
    2. The quality or characteristic of being furtive or covert.
    3. Archaic. The act of stealing.
    adj.
    1. Not disclosing one's true ideology, affiliations, or positions: a stealth candidate.
    2. Having or providing the ability to prevent detection by radar: a stealth bomber; stealth technology.”

    Who has been “stealthy” about the backdoor steps to weaken the federal government by making changes disguised as remedying a so-called “fiscal imbalance” or a “new federalism”?

    There are three distinct sets of people acting in a furtive or covert manner with respect to this issue: the mainstream press (who are remarkably silent now, and during the election, on Harper’s public statements regarding his intentions); the Premiers (many of whom really don’t understand the implications but want more money and more power for their province even if Canada is gutted by this power shift; and Harper.

    Harper is on record as to his intentions, and his New Conservatives have some indications of their intentions.

    Remember Sinclair Stevens? Former Tory cabinet minister?

    In Bloc-Harper.com he quotes Harper in 1995 – Harper unveiled a 20-Point Program for a “New Confederation”. Sinclair’s conclusion? Harper’s 20-Points would result in a more radical change to Canada’s political contours than Meech Lake or the Charlottetown Accord!
    Of course, voters had their say on those two backroom exercises – and they were booted out.

    What is really alarming – and should raise the hair on your neck if you believe in free and open discussion of political changes of consequence, is Sinclair’s statement that: “At the time of his presentation of his New Confederation proposals, Mr. Harper said “they simply require a federal government that is willing to act.”

    Think about that statement by the now-Prime Minister. Did he run for office in 2006 on a platform of radical transformation of the Canadian Confederation?

    Or is the stealthy way in which he failed to debate this issue during the election simply another reason why so many rightly do not trust him, and fear he has a hidden agenda?

    Expect Harper to announce one day soon that the changes are not significant; have been tabled in the New Tory platform; and are within his power as PM to institute ... so what’s the fuss? What’s the need to debate it?

    Harper is showing that he has indeed learned much from Bush and the neocons – do not debate; do not have too many wide ranging media interviews; control the format of any interviews; and just bull ahead with your plans, relying on a docile press and forgetful public ...

    Time will tell if the Canadian news media are as unprofessional as their US counterparts have proven to be.

    So, yes: stealth is the right word to us.

    By Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat, at 4:35 PM  

  • Mezba and the other anonymous moron; there is a huge difference between racism and anti-religion.

    Like I said earlier, why should us non-believers be subjected to some book written through "divine intervention". No one can prove a divine being exists. So all these books are FICTION.

    Look up FICTION and look up FANTASY too.

    Joe Calgary was right about his fantasy leadership candidate.

    Perhaps the 2 of you would be so much better to keep your religious beliefs to yourselves and others like myself won't respond to it.

    So my dream candidate would be Johnny Deep

    Pros: Can play any part
    Can get any women's vote
    Perhaps encourage Keira Knightley to move to Canada

    Cons: Have to worry about ghostly pirates

    By Blogger Fighting for Democracy, at 5:14 PM  

  • Bahhhh... take a pill Mezba... I was being glib.

    Besides which, I resent William Shatner being made fun off. He's,got,the,right,stuff. Spock, help! I'm caught in a Mezba.

    By Blogger Joe Calgary, at 5:27 PM  

  • "Fighting":

    The word you're magnificently failing to find is "anticlericalism," genius. You're on a Liberal site, where most of us have better things to do with our free expression than vent sectarian hatreds.

    There is a whole Tory blogosphere out there. Go squat in it.

    By Anonymous Jason Townsend, at 7:20 PM  

  • "Muslim" is not a race. It's "religionist", not "racist", you half-wits.

    By Anonymous Jason, at 7:23 PM  

  • Catwoman!

    Pros:
    A strong female voice
    Proven innovative, out-of-the-box thinking
    Always walks the centre line
    Focus and nerve
    Sophisticated taste in art and style, not unlike Trudeau
    Proven animal rights record
    Never lets the law stand in her way - perfect for Liberal leadership

    Cons:
    The whip - but then, the vest didn't hurt Stephen


    Kneel before Ms. Kyle, voters!

    By Anonymous Jason, at 7:30 PM  

  • Thanks for the advice CuriosityKilledTheCat.
    I went and looked at the picture of our founding fathers.

    I'm sure you'd be shocked by what I saw. This group of men actually believed that the federal government should have limited powers.

    In fact, in their Constitution Act of 1867, they specifically gave the provinces the authority in these areas; Direct taxation,
    Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Public and Reformatory Prisons,
    Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Public and Reformatory Prisons,
    Municipal Institutions in the Province,
    The Solemnization of Marriage in the Province,
    Non-Renewable Natural Resources, Agriculture and Immigration, and finally Education.

    Shockingly, this seems closer to Harpers model than our current.

    Also, since when does publicly unveiling "a 20-Point Program for a “New Confederation”, become stealth?

    By Anonymous Joe Edmonton, at 7:33 PM  

  • jason Townsend:

    I think there can be anticlericals or religionists or both on each side of the aisle, Liberal and Conservative.

    By Anonymous Jason, at 7:34 PM  

  • uhhh ... shockingly missed in the whole Mohammed speculation is the problem of Canadian editorial cartoonists

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:58 PM  

  • CuriosityKilledTheCat,

    You went to some effort in your rebuttal argument.

    I appreciate your effort and remember, my answer is not a personal affront, but only a reply in debate.

    You have placed your confidence in Sinclair Stevens for the backbone of your arguments.

    Sadly, Sinclair has let you and everyone down.

    He estabished a website in the name of a respected Legion and expressed views and opinions as those of the association.

    The association, based in the maritimes was made aware of the Ontario based site, determined it was in the name of Sinclair Stevens and protested the site, mentioning possible legal proceedings.

    You can understand why no one who knows about this fiasco can put any stock in what Sinclair has to say. TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 10:56 PM  

  • Royal Commonwealth Society of Toronto. [Whois info]

    Site registered owner: Sinclair Stevens. Also the Bloc-Harper website. May 2005. Details:

    http://strongworld.blogspot.com/2005/05/royal-commonwealth-society-of-toronto.html#comments

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 11:13 PM  

  • Jason Townsend, at 5:20 PM

    Yes, this is a Liberal website. You're smarter than I give you credit for. I noticed you used the words "free expression" but maybe that only applies to genuises like yourself.

    Perhaps you can play with the worry beads in your pocket and stop by the confessional booth and ask for forgiveness for the dumb things you say and do.

    How can a person have sectarian hatred when they don't believe in religion.

    Am I anti-Santa Claus because I don't believe in him. I don't believe in the tooth fairy either.

    Perhaps your pals, the lepechauns and the bigfoots could convince me to be tolerable to another non-existent beings.

    By Blogger Fighting for Democracy, at 12:31 AM  

  • The Toronto Star's James "Jim" Travers.

    Pro:
    - The guy is "bang-on" every time! If you've never read his columns, start! Any good Liberals reads it and says "Yes... YEs... YES!"
    - Smart, distinguished, relatively high profile.
    - Not part of the "old guard"

    Con:
    - Journalist... damn journalists
    - Along the same line... has written too much, his opinions are a matter of public record. Ignatieff learned that "con" the hard way.

    I think he's a great pick! Think about it.

    By Blogger West Block, at 1:14 PM  

  • TonyGuitar, I agree – Sinclair has dubious political credentials. But do not confuse the messenger with the message. His argument, based on the facts he tabled, bear out his conclusion: Harper is an advocate of significant change in Canada’s confederation, and will do this through bilateral deals with Premiers.

    A further point re why I characterized the “New Federalism” and “fiscal imbalance” thrusts of Harper as part of a stealth campaign to change Canada. The New Tory Party is on record (through its president) as consciously deciding after the 2004 election that it had to suppress comments by party candidates and avoid discussions of party policies in order to gain power. During the election, the major announcement about Harper’s so-called “fiscal imbalance” was made in Quebec, and received very little debate in other parts of the country.

    Even now, there is very little debate about that concept. And Harper is negotiating one on one with the Premiers to shoehorn in change which is radical, as compared to the way the country now operates.

    “Fiscal imbalance” is a code word for constitutional remaking, selected so as to frame the discussions in such a way that Harper is on the side of the angels, truth, motherhood, apple pie and the flag, while those who oppose him are in favour of an “unbalanced” or unfair fiscal arrangement in this country.

    Strip this concept to its bones and you see that it makes the assumption that Harper’s view of the universe (a federal government which is a shadow of its current robust self, with the provinces having far more power than they have now) is the correct one for Canada.

    Understand this: Harper and his New Tories were not elected because the voters of this country agreed with their plans to dismantle confederation as it now exists. That plan was introduced in a stealthy manner, and is being implemented right now in a stealthy manner.

    There has not been any honest discussion, in public forums and in legislatures, of the New Tories’ desire to dramatically change this country.

    At least in the USA there is now far more honest debate of the differences between those who favour the power of the states over those who favour a strong central government. The least we could expect from a prime minister who rode to office on an anti-corruption campaign, is the honesty to debate in public the far reaching changes he wishes to make to the country, rather than hide away in private rooms with the premiers and carve up the turkey ...

    Why not open your discussions with the Premiers on your so-called New Federalism and fiscal imbalance to television, Mr Prime Minister, so that the voters can see and hear what the people in the room are doing?

    At least such televised sessions would be a an example of the open government your party ran on during the election.

    By Anonymous CuriosityKilledTheCat, at 3:42 PM  

  • CuriousCat, There is certainly some truth to some of the points you make about potential for change.

    The part about more control for the provinces is correct and explains the gains Harper made in Quebec.

    Though that had a lot to do with unpopular liberal candidates as well.

    The changes may have been extreme looking in the beginning, but the process of democratic governance with a minority is a watering down of legislation extremes.

    I hope the whistle blower Bill C-11 is finalized with strong penalties for bosses who would damage eployee careers simply because they point out fraud and money laundering.

    A good bill C-11 and the new accounts and audits for all ministries and departments will save us $millions of our national revenues. TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 12:29 AM  

  • Hey, you have a great blog here! You really are very talented and deserve an honest compliment, congratulations! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

    I have a money making opportunity on the internet site/blog. It successfully covers money making opportunity on the internet related stuff.

    Come and check it out when you get time, as I would be honored to help a hard-working person like you become successful in this business. Scott.

    By Blogger Scott A. Edwards, at 4:07 AM  

  • Neurolinguistic Programming

    In the early 1970s in America Richard Bandler, then a young college student studied the work of Fritz Perls and later Virginia Satir and found that he could reproduce their high-level therapy skills to a degree that even surprised him. Bandler seemed to have a natural ability to mimic (model) the language patterns by Virginia and Fritz.

    At the University of California at Santa Cruz, Bandler who was well versed in the teachings of patterns in mathematics and computers teamed up with a college professor, John Grinder to help him understand the processes that were at work. Soon Bandler and Grinder, who used what he knew about patterns in linguistics, created a new model for personal growth called NeuroLinguistic Programming.

    Bandler and Grinder had set out to model the hypnotic skills of Milton Erickson. They had astounding results. They built a communication model about human "thinking" and "processing" and used that model of how we see images, hear sounds, reproduces smells and tactile experiences in our mind to track and model the structure of subjective experiences.

    Sounds very complicated but really it works very simply. Here is an example as used by Paul McKenna - probably the best & most successful hypnotist in the world.

    Close your eyes and think of a negative memory. Become involved in the situation as best as you can. Feel the emotions that you felt, see the things you saw and hear the things you heard.

    Now take that memory and project it onto a mental screen seeing yourself in the picture. Put a frame around the picture and view it as if it is an old photograph. Next drain all the colour from the picture and shrink the screen to the size of a matchbox.

    Have the feelings associated with the picture decreased in any way?

    Another good example of NLP involves Anchors. Have you ever smelt a certain perfume or aftershave and had it remind you of a certain person or situation? Gone to a certain place that brings feelings long forgotten flooding back? Or been in any situation that creates emotional responses that would not normally be associated with it? Well if you can answer yes to any of these then you have experienced anchors. Some anchors are associated with positive feelings and some with negative emotions. However, you should be aware that anchors can be consciously installed or already existing ones altered. Here is an example:

    Think of a time when you were really happy. If you can't think of one then imagine something that would make you feel really happy. See what you would see, hear what you would hear and feel what you would feel. Really get into the picture and try to experience it as though it were happening now.

    Now brighten the colours and make them richer. Increase the volume. Make the picture bigger, brighter, louder. That's it and more and more....

    Now press your first finger against your thumb and fully experience your happy feelings. Do this everyday for 2 weeks and you will create an anchor that will instantly recreate these feelings. Whenever you want to feel like that again just press your thumb and first finger together and wham the feelings will come flooding back! Don't believe me? Just try it and see!!! subliminal

    By Blogger Personal Development, at 10:41 AM  

  • Interesting post you got here. It would be great to read something more about this matter.
    BTW look at the design I've made myself A level escorts

    By Blogger 123 123, at 8:06 AM  

  • Nice article as for me. I'd like to read more concerning this topic. The only thing it would also be great to see here is a few pictures of some gizmos.
    John Kripke
    Cell phone blocker

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:14 AM  

  • Don't believe on their political propaganda they only playing us.

    By Anonymous tuxedo best, at 9:41 AM  

  • Thanks for the important blog

    By Anonymous Data recovery software, at 2:27 AM  

  • Good post, thanks for share and nice information, cerita seks or you can go at cerita sex

    By Anonymous Cerita Seks, at 10:35 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home