Thursday, June 01, 2006

Youth for Volpe

This may be the funniest parody site ever.

Update: The site is down but Policy Watch has saved a copy of the site on pdf.

Update: The site lives on here.

posted by calgarygrit at 12:09 p.m.

19 Comments:

  • Don't be such a pussy.

    I'd rather see more attack web sites and less sleazy maggots like Jim Karygiannis.

    By Blogger Raymaker, at 1:24 p.m.  

  • DL, first, this isn't some instant messenger message you're writing, here. Make a point of using proper capitalization and punctuation; it's hard to read your posts this way.

    Also, you need to be realistic. It was terribly foolish for Volpe to have accepted money from executives' children. Even if it was following the letter of the law, the optics were terrible, both for him and for the party. It was a mistake, and it may well have sunk his campaign.

    (I am being charitable in saying "may", here, and only because it's unlikely that Ignatieff, Kennedy, and the rest will survive scrutiny when the loans come due, either. Liberals are terrible at garnering small donations, and I haven't seen any reason for that to have changed. The rest of the candidates just put it off.)

    That said, I think DL here has a point. It IS possible that the site was created by some enterprising Tory; it's pretty unlikely, though. It's much more probable that it was created on behalf of a competing candidate.

    This is worrying news.

    Why? Because it shows that the "contest of ideas" that the Liberal leadership campaign is supposed to represent is potentially breaking down into a nasty (and personal) political knife fight. Sure, it may not seem like a big problem to attack Volpe, considering the terrible optics of the scandal and his non-frontrunner status, but how long will it be before the Ignatieff, Rae, Brison, Dryden and Kennedy camps start doing it to each other?

    Remember, Liberals, that you aren't the only ones reading these blogs and comments. Just like on the cop shows, "anything you say can and will be used against you". Rest assured that Harper and his Republican-lite minions are taking careful note of every mudball that Liberals hurl at each other; rest equally assured that they can and will be used against you when the next election comes.

    Democratic-party-style "circular firing squads" are not something that Canadian Liberals need to import. Trust me, they suck. Badly. The Liberals have a difficult enough job ahead of them without aiding and abetting Harper's Republican consultants.

    By Blogger Demosthenes, at 1:34 p.m.  

  • demosthenes: "Because it shows that the "contest of ideas" that the Liberal leadership campaign is supposed to represent is potentially breaking down into a nasty (and personal) political knife fight."

    I direct you to the aforementioned sleazy maggot Jim Karygiannis.

    By Blogger Raymaker, at 1:42 p.m.  

  • Did no one in the Liberal Party send Joe the post election memo entitled: "What Not To Do In Order For The Liberal Party To Be Re-elected Someday?"
    Sheeesh -

    By Blogger leftdog, at 1:58 p.m.  

  • The site is hosted through Go-Daddy in Arizona. It was setup pretty quick and well done suggesting someone with skills and a relationship with Go-Daddy. Do any of the other campaigns use Go-Daddy?

    By Blogger The Rat, at 3:14 p.m.  

  • Davenport Liberal should retract his suggestion that loans are illegal under C-24. They are not.

    By Blogger Peter Loewen, at 4:31 p.m.  

  • Davenport Liberal should retract his suggestion that loans are illegal under C-24. They are not.

    By Blogger Peter Loewen, at 4:31 p.m.  

  • I think the site's been taken down. It's not working for me. Could just be my browser though.

    By Blogger Zac, at 4:39 p.m.  

  • Uh oh, people were getiing to close to "Mr. Big". The site is gone. I hope someone cached it . . .

    By Blogger The Rat, at 4:45 p.m.  

  • Glad I checked it out earlier in the day. I wonder if Volpe threatened to sue them.

    By Blogger Red Tory, at 5:11 p.m.  

  • C'mon...it was you with the lawsuit wasn't it LF?

    By Blogger Zac, at 6:32 p.m.  

  • ". . . above and Beyond the Law"

    Isn't that how most Liberals view themselves?

    By Blogger The Rat, at 9:11 p.m.  

  • Well DL, C-24 actually makes explicit provisions for loans, so I don't think it's terribly logical to suggest that something which is clearly allowed in the legislation is contrary to the spirit of the legislation.

    These loans have to be repaid, and they have to include interest. Accordingly, the potential quid pro quo is severely limited.

    By Blogger Peter Loewen, at 12:22 a.m.  

  • I guess Volpe's office convinced the CIRA to take the site down (the group that controls .ca domains).

    I propose we create the website
    VolpeforInternetCensorship.com

    By Blogger Kirk Schmidt, at 9:39 a.m.  

  • Hey Dave, isn't what you just said almost the definition of censorship? Why is it bad that a website attack the Liberals? The site came down on a technicality, would you have fought to take it down if it was properly registered? If so, you are a prime example of a censorship supporter. And a danger to democracy.

    By Blogger The Rat, at 4:02 p.m.  

  • I was following the Joe Volpe and youthforvolpe.ca website discussion that the Globe and Mail reports today was pulled down by CIRA after pressure from Joe Volpe's lawyers. This brought up some cool legal and free speech issues. I noticed that on smalldeadanimals.com, Mike F. asked:

    "Perhaps everybody should contact CIRA at http://www.cira.ca/en/contactus-1.html and ask if this is their standard operating policy."

    Mike F., that is a very good question. Here is the problem.

    CIRA has a very clear policy (as do all web registrars) that you cannot register a website without real and correct personal information: In other words, that they will cancel your web registration if you use a fake name.

    There are many reasons for this, some of them even good ones.

    So that may be why CIRA was persuaded (that and an oodle of Liberal connections) to pull it down.

    It is likely that Volpe would have a much harder time pulling down the:

    http://policycanada.blogspot.com

    site because the Blogger is posting under his own name and isn't violating any laws or Blogger Terms of Service that I'm aware of.

    It appears to me very unlikely that the creator of this content, "Mike Hunt", would object to this being reposted. There is no affirmative copyright statement on the PDF and I believe that the creator intended it to be in the "public domain".

    However, I am not a lawyer and I strongly advice you NOT to visit:

    http://policycanada.blogspot.com

    except to complain to the Blogger and warn him that he shouldn't post that hilariously funny youthforvolpe.ca spoof until all copyright, third-party copyright, and any other legal issues are settled.

    Finally, I read that another courageous Blogger, Richard, plans to host this controversial youthforvolpe.ca website website (not as a PDF, but as actual working website) on an American web server under his own name registered with a ".com" address.

    He intends to use this domain name:

    http://www.youthforvolpe.no-libs.com/

    I caution you against visiting there for the reasons given above. I draw your attention to this URL because, as a website registrant myself who has three .com names hosted (click on my name link to visit one), I'm curious about free speech issues regarding the Internet and I consider this a lively discussion!

    I've heard that Richard may be the infamous "Mike Hunt" who, naughty boy, may have provided incorrect info to CIRA, which resulted in his youthforvolpe.ca website quite rightly being removed. However, I am in no way alleging this so please do not sue me, Richard.

    Thanks.


    FINAL WARNING: All web addresses in bold type should not be visited in order to potentially protect other people's copyrights and other valid legal interests. They are given for the purpose of advancing the discussion regarding freedom of speech and Internet domain name registration — and because they are already in the public domain. The only other reason the website addresses are given is so you can do a "Blogger profile" or "whois" search and complain to the website owners directly if you believe that their behaviour is wrong.

    [cross posted from the previous CalgaryGrit post because it was relevant to this one]

    By Blogger Christoph Dollis, at 6:02 p.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Kirk Schmidt, at 12:43 p.m.  

  • screwed up there and only realized aftrer I posted...

    Yes, I would let it stay up. The website was nothing more than a large political cartoon - and while it may look official for a moment, I'm sure most people realize that it's satire after reading a paragraph...

    Plus, this would have been great opportunity for Volpe to say, "Yes, our campaign team screwed up. I'm very sorry that this happed. But it has helped all of us realize how convoluted our financial contribution system is. And whether I win or lose, I am dedicated to getting electoral laws changed so that this does not happen again."

    At least that way you save face...

    By Blogger Kirk Schmidt, at 12:54 p.m.  

  • It cannot succeed in actual fact, that is exactly what I think.

    By Anonymous www.la-rioja-3d.com, at 4:54 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home