Time For A Canadian Steel Workers Union

During the NAFTA and FTA debates here in Alberta waaaay back in the late 1980's I took a contrarian position to the rest of the left. Call it pragmatic criticism. I said that the labour movement should get over its knee jerk response to these accords because the Americans were inherently protectionist, and that those in Canada who opposed the accords were no more pro union or pro worker than their American counterparts. In the later case I was refering to Mel Hurtig, Mr. Canadian Nationalism and his Council of Canadians. I worked for Hurtig publishers in the seventies, and tried to organize a union at his site. Well needless to say Hurtig publishing was as anti-union as any other company, despite publishing progressive liberal left books. He also printed his books offshore, using his connection with a Japanese publishing company for whom he had distribution rights for North America.

In the case of the Americans, I stated that the Democrats and Republicans were birds of a feather when it came to fair trade, they talked free trade when it was to their advantage and practiced protectionism against opening their markets to the world.

Well the chickens came home to roost. I opposed FTA and NAFTA because they were not Fair Trade deals, and the Mulroney Tories gave up too much to the U.S.
So now we have various NAFTA rulings, on wheat this week, on soft wood lumber, as well as on free movement of cattle. etc. etc. in favour of Canada and America ignores them.

We have the most productive manufacturing sector in North America, our manufacturing base has expanded under NAFTA despite off shoring. For a couple of reasons, one being health care and social benefits that reduce costs and better educated technologically adaptable workers. The other is the secondary manufacturing like Magna that supplies the auto industry, and Toyota and Honda etc. moving here to expand into the North American market via the Auto Pact.

While we still are waiting for the Americans to pay us back for their illegal tarrifs and duties on soft wood a new fight is brewing south of the border. During his first term George W. put an illegal tarrif on steel coming into the U.S. while directed at China, Japan and Europe it impacted directly on our steel industry. Ironically a steel industry that shares the same union, the United Steelworkers of America (USWA).

During the anti-globalization rallies begining in Seattle in 99 the USWA campaigned against China and its steel production demanding protection for American jobs. It was a very jingoist campaign, which brought on side the likes of America First Pat Buchanan. What the USWA was doing was the work for its corporate bosses, bosses who over the last six years have changed ownership and have been integrated into the global market. As many steel companies now are under foriegn ownership.

Only Canada has an independent home grown steel industry. Split between unionized Stelco and non union Dofasco. And so we are a foreign industry, accused of dumping into the U.S. When the elephant sneezes we get a cold.

Bush Jr.'s tarrifs hurt Canada as much as it hurt China. Probably more so, and it can be credited as a factor in Stelco's decline into bankruptcy. It pitted union brother against union brother, and USWA true to form, even with a Canadian VP on its international board, emphasised the America in USW.

Well the WTO discussions are on. And USWA is at it again; doing their corporate masters biding lobbying for protectionism for American steel with little regard for its Canadian members. In their narrow jingoist America First nationalism, they seem to have forgotten they are an 'International' union, meaning that they operate in Canada representing Canadian workers.

The Canadian auto worker used to suffer these same kind of indignities when they were members of the UAW. And while American trade unionists were smashing Japanese cars in protest, Canadian workers split from the UAW and formed the CAW. As jobs get trashed in Ford and GM in the US, and pensions and benefits are slashed under the sell out leadership of the UAW, in Canada CAW has saved jobs, gotten pension payouts, and most job losses will be ameliorated through attrition. And CAW has gotten Ford and GM lucrative government handouts. Now that did not stop these two American companies from cutting their noses to spite their faces, by closing productive plants in Canada. American corporations and their unions are a joint venture in jingoistic America First nationalism, see my Whats Good For GM is Not Good for Canadian Workers.

While USWA in Canada has adapted over the years to plant shut downs, by developing training programs and expanding who it represents it still faces the hard fact that it is an American union in Canada. And America comes first to the USWA. While in the US the declining membership in USWA and other large industrial unions has forced them to consider mergers and acquisitons just like corporate America, to keep themselves afloat. In Canada diversification of representation and organizing the unorganized, as well as raiding other unions, has kept CAW alive and kicking. While USWA struggles in declining membership in Canada so much so that it merged with the Woodworkers union in B.C. But mergers and aquisitions in the labour movement are a limited opportunity and do not represent real growth.

For steel workers in Canada it is time for autonomy and independence and creating a real democratic union run by the members themselves not by hacks in Washington. Despite having an token International VP, USWA is still an American union, it only keeps Canadians on its board to say it is an International.

The time is now. USWA is launching another protectionist campaign that could hurt Canadian steel. And Stelco is coming out of bankruptcy, which would allow a new independent union to actively demand represntation on the board to guarntee job protection. And the workers could have a Canadian Union President instead of a token International VP. It worked for autoworkers. It can work for Steelworkers. And the irony is this, USWA came to power and dominance in Canada during the Cold War, when it was used to smash the Independent Canadian Mine and Mill Workers Union, which was declared a Red Union by the AFL/CIO.

Bush Admits To Being Stupid

This headline says it all, Bush admits intelligence failures So much for the theory of Intelligent Design.

1812 Remembered

As I said in my blog on Amb-ass-asdor Wilkins, without Canada the US wouldn't have the Star Spangled banner. Little did I know that my remarks would be aired on Fox TV.

Hey buddy before you go declaring Canada a Terrorist State or part of the Axis of Evil remember we got yer oil. And we whupped yer ass the last time ya invaded us. And we have been eating Laura Secord choclates ever since.

A tip o the blog to Scott Tribe for this.

1+1=2

Robert Novak the disgruntled Democrat turned Republican mouthpiece says that George Bush knows who Deep Throat is in the Plame affair. Novak and Karl Rove are old cronies, and their little trysts of dishing dirt go all the way back to leaks during George W campaign for Governor. Rove used Novak then for his dirty tricks campaigns too. So despite the red herring of 'another White House source' (which is like the guys on the grassy knoll) its a simple case of 1+1=2 .If Bush knows, and Novak knows it must be Karl Rove. Nes pas.

No One Believes You

Tory TV Ads Backfire

While the Liberal TV Ads were exposed by the NDP to be full of Liberals posing as ordinary Canadians.In the case of the Conservative Party TV ads to make Harper look, soft, human and reasonable, no one had to tell Canadians that the folks in the ads were Conservatives. And despite all his best efforts to look human, approachable, and of the people, no one was fooled by Harpers performance. He didn't win an Academy or a Gemini Award. The Canadian people have given him a Raspberry.


A survey of 1,350 undecided voters who saw the Tory television ads were asked last week to pass judgment. Fifty-nine per cent said the ads would have no impact on their vote. But 19 per cent said the spots made them more likely to vote Liberal, and nine per cent said the ads pushed them toward the NDP. In other words, more than a quarter said they were inclined to do the opposite of what the ads intended. Only 12 per cent said the ads made them more likely to vote for the party that actually paid for them, raising questions about whether the Tory campaign has backfired.

Singing We Won't Get Fooled Again, Canadians held their noses turned off the TV ads for Trust Me Tory and told the guy on the phone that well Harpers TV ads worked, they are definetly not voting for him now.

The same survey found that six per cent of 1,046 undecided voters who saw a Liberal television ad said it made them more likely to vote Tory, and eight per cent said it pushed them toward the NDP. Decima's chief pollster says it's unusual that a political party would get so much advertising bang from its rival's buck. "It's an unusual circumstance and obviously it's something the Conservatives would need to take a look at,'' said Bruce Anderson."There's more than anecdotal evidence . . . that the Conservative advertising doesn't seem to be all that effective. The numbers say it's not.''

Which begs the question, if the Party War Rooms believe this; Television the main medium for strategists How come the Liberals and Conservatives blew it? The winner in the TV Ad war, the NDP. They had a message, they had humour, and they didn't use party members as actors. Cause Canadians now have higher standards for our actors. And we have higher standards for TV production. The country that brings you CSI, NCSI, etc. should not have to put up with ads that look like the Friendly Giant or Mr. Dress up.

Mea Culpa 100,000 Deaths later

Well he finally admited it, he lied, and he led America into a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's and thousands of Americans. He forced them to fight, with out supplies, without a break, with no national draft, with no kids of the rich in the War. He Lied! They Died!

But hey this is no Mea Culpa, this is No apology from the War President he is still defending the indefesible. But now we know, He Lied.




War Criminal

Bush: Iraq Invasion My Responsibility

President Bush said Wednesday the responsibility for invading Iraq based in part on faulty weapons intelligence rested solely with him, taking on the issue in his most direct and personal terms in the 1,000-plus days since the war's first shots."It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said. "As president, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."

War and the Market State

A tip o' the blog to bradspangler.com for drawing my attention to these articles.

Which led to inadvertent connections between two articles. Because again in the syncronistic universe that is the WWW, I was looking for his link to this, Counter-Economics: review of excellent book on smuggling and came across another article, which describes the actual nature of what folks mistakenly call globalization.

The creation of the new market states is the result of NAFTA, the EU, and other new evolving models of contractual corporate and state cooperation. They are the WTO, APEC , etcagreements and meetings that are occuring that have set in motion the evolution of the market state that Bobbitt speaks of below.

The War in the Balkans followed by the war in Afghanistan followed by the war in Iraq is not just the war of Empire and Imperialism but of private armies and private contractors, becoming in effect a state, since they provide privatized functions of the state as I have blogged about.See; War! What's it Good For? Profit

The attack on the Balkans was an attempt to end the last vestiges of State Capitalism and pound the Serbians into submissive acceptance of the privatization of the State through strategic bombing of industries.

It is the same with Iraq. It too was the last state capitalist country in the Middle East that had to be privatized. The other countries were less vulnerable since they are hierarchical societies that had opened their markets to capitalism, while remaining fuedalistic social constructs.

An interesting analysis of this concept of the War of the Market State can be found at Global Guerrillas which reviews this book;

The Shield of Achilles: War, Peace, and the Course of History

by Philip Bobbitt

" A new form of the State — the market state – is emerging from this relationship in much the same way that earlier forms since the 15th century have emerged, as a consequence of the sixth great epochal war in modern history.

The “market-state” is the latest constitutional order, one that is just emerging in a struggle for primacy with the dominant constitutional order of the 20th century, the nation-state. Whereas the nation-state based its legitimacy on a promise to better the material well-being of the nation, the market-state promises to maximize the opportunity of each individual citizen. The current conflict is one of several possible wars of the market-states as they seek to open up societies to trade in commerce, ideas, and immigration which excite hostility in those groups that want to use law to enforce religious or ethnic orthodoxy.

A state that privatizes most of its functions will inevitably defend itself by employing its own people as mercenaries-with equally profound strategic consequences. "

So if the exisiting nation states are using private armies, and further privatization due to the transformation of these new models of transnational corporate/state agreements creates the historic conditions for the development of market states then the current conflict called the War on Terror is a conflict between the black market states, such as Bin Laden Inc. against 'legitimate' transnational corporate states like Halliburton USA Inc.

In fact all of the current 'Stan states (Afghanistan, Kyhrigistan, etc.) which were once colonial outposts of the Soviet Union and were not fully developed state capitalist economies are now home to much of the black market. And while they are dictatorships still, they are ones that capitalism finds friendly, and able to do business with. But within these states exists another state, that is international in scope and is linked with organized crime, international intelligence agencies, terrorist networks, drug smugglers. etc. etc.

The way these black market states are funded is through what Libertarians call counter economics. Piracy by any other name. The very origins of the primitive accumulation of capital under fuedalism that gave rise to banking, trade and eventually full blown capitalism.

The Necessity of Gangster Capitalism: Primitive Accumulation in Russia and China

It is useful at this point to quote from the book review of Illicit from Global Guerrillas

Moises Naim, the editor of Foreign Policy Magazine, has an excellent new book called Illicit on the rise of global smuggling networks. It's a must read.

Globalization Melts the Map

Moises copiously documents how globalization and rampant interconnectivity has led to the rise of vast global smuggling networks. These networks live in the space between states. They are simultaneously everywhere and nowhere at the same time. He shows how these networks make money through an arbitrage of the differences between the legal systems (and a desire to prosecute) of our isolated islands of sovereignty. He also shows how their flagrant use of corruption can enable them to completely take over sections of otherwise functional states.

By all accounts the amount of money involved is immense. In aggregate, the networks that form this parallel "black" global supply chain, have a "GDP" of $1-3 trillion (some estimates are as high as 10% of the world's economy) and are growing seven times faster than legal trade. These networks supply the huge demand for:

• Drugs (both recreational and pharmaceutical).
• Undocumented workers (for corporations, home services, and the sex trade).
• Weapons (from small arms to RPGs, many come from cold war arsenals).
• Rip-offs of intellectual property (from digital content to brand named consumer goods).
• Laundered and unregulated financial flows.

This supply chain isn't run by the vertically integrated cartels and mafias of the last century (those hierarchies are too vulnerable, slow, and unresponsive to be competitive in the current environment). The new undifferentiated structures are highly decentralized, horizontal, and fluid. They specialize in cross border movement and therefore can handle all types of smuggling simultaneously. They are also very reliant on modern technologies to rapidly transport and coordinate their global operations.

I would also reccomend Robert Naylors Hot Money, though dated, from the 1970's, it was one of the first to talk about International Finance and the black market and its impact on the bank meltdowns like BCIC and the connection of the banking industry to the black markets and their involvement in the debt crisis in the developing world. It was published by Black Rose books. A new edition is out as well he has written another work along similar lines, critiquing international relations, crime and hot money, entitled the Wages of Crime.

Thus the War on Terror is a war on two fronts. One to smash and transform the last outposts of state capitalism in Europe and the Middle East, and a war on the unregulated market.

Global Guerrillas says; The similarity between these commercial networks and those of modern terrorism (my global guerrillas) is not incidental.

Nor is it incidental that the American Empire is sowing the seeds of its own self destruction, not only in expensive military operations that rack up thousands of corpses and trillions in deficits, but in the fact that like the British Empire before it in order to finance these wars, it too relies on the black market. The British Empire set itself up for decline as it persued its Opium Wars against China. The US set itself up in the 1980's providing stinger missles to the Mujahadin in Afghanistan who paid for them in opium money. Who transported them through smuggling routes, still with us today used by Bin Laden Inc.

And quoting Bobitt again;
The current conflict is one of several possible wars of the market-states as they seek to open up societies to trade in commerce, ideas, and immigration which excite hostility in those groups that want to use law to enforce religious or ethnic orthodoxy. States make war, not brigands; and the Al Qaeda network is a sort of virtual state, with a consistent source of finance, a recognized hierarchy of officials, foreign alliances, an army, published laws, even a rudimentary welfare system. It has declared war on the U.S. for much the same reason that Japan did in 1941: because we appear to frustrate its ambitions to regional hegemony.

Capitalism has outgrown the Nation State. It reguired it for its period of ascendency. Now that it is the real domination of everything , of all social relations it needs a new state, a market state. One that can continually destroy its overproductive capacities. As capitalism evolves better technonological production, increases productivity and reduces the need for real labour, it amasses capital, which becomes unproductive. It is here that the new market state can use this capital to create permanent war, small scale localized war, that does not threaten its global expansion, but allows it areas for wide scale destruction of productive capabilities to offset its cancerous growth.

If war is privatized and all state functions are privatized, then the individual is no longer identified as a citizen, or as a wage labourer, but as 'free' individual, a contractor in a market state. Capitalism will have evolved to its logical conlusion; that we remain wage slaves but no longer to a particular boss or business but to the market. Our alientation will be complete. And it will be a society of barbarism, of all against all.

Labour 'is and remains the presupposition' of capital (Marx, 1973, p. 399). Capital cannot liberate itself from labour; it depends on the imposition of necessary labour, the constituent side of surplus labour, upon the world's working classes. It has to posit necessary labour at the same time as which it has to reduce necessary labour to the utmost in order to increase surplus value. This reduction develops labour's productive power and, at the same time, the real possibility of the realm of freedom.

The circumstance that less and less socially necessary labour time is required to produce, for want of a better expression, the necessities of life, limits the realm of necessity and so allows the blossoming of what Marx characterised as the realm of freedom. Within capitalist society, this contradiction can be contained only through force (Gewalt), including not only the destruction of productive capacities, unemployment, worsening conditions, and widespread poverty, but also the destruction of human life through war, ecological disaster, famine, the burning of land, poisoning of water, devastation of communities, the production of babies for profit, the usage of the human body as a commodity to be exchange or operated on, the industrialisation of human production through cloning etc.

The existence of Man as a degraded, exploited, debased, forsaken and enslaved being, indicates that capitalist production is not production for humans - it is production through humans. In other words, the value form represents not just an abstraction from the real social individual. It is an abstraction that is 'true in practice' (cf. Marx, 1973, p. 105). The universal reduction of all specific human social practice to the one, some abstract form of labour, from the battlefield to the cloning laboratory, indicates that the separation which began with primitive accumulation appears now in the biotechnical determination to expropriate human beings. Capitalism has gone a long way. Indifferent to life, it 'was satisfied with nothing more than appropriating an excessive number of working hours' (Dalla Costa, 1995a, p. 21). It is now engaged in the production of human-workers.

The Permanence of Primitive Accumulation: Notes on Social Constitution

We Don't Blog Cause We Are Honest

A tip o the blog to Accidental Deliberation for this item

While some NDP candidates have blogs, the party opted against a general election blog, because it didn't want something that didn't look sincere, said party spokesman Brad Lavigne."The Web world is a particularly savvy one and I think visitors can smell bogus blogs a mile away," Mr. Lavigne said.

So what are you saying Brad that if you had someone blog it would be like the Conservatives Flog, that all political campaign blogs are flogs? Or that blogging is inherently dishonest. Just admit you screwed up and will get a blog soon. Better sooner than later. This is an even lamer excuse than your earlier comment.

"In the NDP camp, insider Brad Lavigne says blogs have had a minimal impact so far on leader Jack Layton's campaign. The top priority is to track the other leaders' daily campaigns and mainstream news coverage.'' Why Jack Doesn't Blog

Admit it you just didn't think of it, and now that everyone has one your brain trust in the War Room figures it's clever not to have one. Just admit it you screwed up.

Other NDP Stories

Bullies Who Us?

So both Don Newman and Mike Duffy had talking heads from American Think Tanks on their shows this afternoon, commenting on the lamentable breakdown in Canada US relations and U.S. Amb-ass-ador Wilkins comments. Both were right wing apologists, you can tell by how they dressed and by the insititutes they spoke for.

Newmans guest stated that he was surprised at Harpers sudden about face on the US after he had been handed a "creem puff on a silver platter by the Cato Insititute' editorial in the Washington Times. Yep Harper did a St. Peter and denied his lord.U.S. ambassador should stay out of election: Harper

Wilkins was directed to criticize Martin and Canada from no less than the Darth Vader of the Empire; Dick Cheney.

But the stupidest comment came from the commentator on Mike Duffy's show who claimed, and this is not the first time I have heard this, we were 'bullying' the U.S. Yep little old us, the polite Canadians, those mousy folks up north,with the less population than California, and No Guns. Bullies! Kicking the shins of Uncle Sam to get his attention obviously got his attention, and we are bullies. Yep guess we aren't going to be invited to the lighting of the White House Holiday Tree.

Michael Ignatieff the Gentle Imperialist

It's the syncronicity of cyberspace research. While researching on the internet for material for an article I come across something interesting, a quote, an article, a reference that pops out and while not directly related to what I may be writing I clip to use later. This is one of those.......

In the face of this attempt to extend what can only be called the American Empire, intellectuals and political figures are not only returning to the idea of imperialism, but also to the view of it propounded by its earlier nineteenth century proponents as constituting a grand civilizing mission. Comparisons of the United States to Imperial Rome and Imperial Britain are now common within the mainstream press. All that is needed to make it completely serviceable is to rid the concept of its old Marxist associations of economic hierarchy and exploitation—not to mention racism.

According to Michael Ignatieff, Professor of Human Rights Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, writing in the New York Times Magazine (July 28, 2002), “[I]mperialism used to be the white man’s burden. This gave it a bad reputation. But imperialism doesn’t stop being necessary because it is politically incorrect.” In referring to U.S. war operations in Afghanistan he writes: “Yet the Special Forces aren’t social workers. They are an imperial detachment, advancing American power and interests in Central Asia. Call it peacekeeping or nation-building, call it what you like, imperial policing is what is going on in Mazar. In fact, Americaentire war on terror is an exercise in imperialism. This may come as a shock to Americans, who don’t like to think of their country as an empire. But what else can you call America’s legions of soldiers, spooks and Special Forces straddling the globe?” The Rediscovery of Imperialism by John Bellamy Foster

Also See Ignatieff

WTO Who Cares?

The WTO is meeting in its long anticipated Hong Kong round to talk about agribusiness subsidies. But despite the long anticipated meeting it is going nowhere. Nor can it. Despite the anti-WTO protests, despite last summers G8 meeting pledging Trade Not Aid, despite Bono and Geldoff, the very fabric of capitalism is the industrialization of agriculture, and this is the contradiction that belies this round of trade talks. Capitalism developed out of large scale farming production with the end of the commons in England.

Today the modern form of agribusiness destroys the family farm here in the industrialized world as much as it has declared war on subsistence farming in the developing world. The subsidies given out to Agribusiness are being equated with cooperatives and producer marketing boards. Hence the attack on the Canadian Wheat Board and the Quebec Dairy boards by Americans and by our own comprador farmers from the Reform/Alliance/Conservative party. And they are no more equivalent than the subsidies given to Agribusinesses that market bananas from Ecuador, like Dole, and the farm cooperatives that grow the bananas and are paid below market price by Dole.

Ever since the GATT Uruguay talks ended, more and more subsistence farming in the Third world and the newly Industrialized nations has been replaced by large scale export farming controlled by Agribusiness Giants like ADM,Cargill, Nestles, etc..

And where export products such as sugar, rice, soya, and dairy products, are in competition with the G8 they have no fair trade market. Even in their particular unique export markets such as bananas and cocoa and coffee, the internecine trade zones between the EU and the USA punitively punish these producing countries, and do not pay a fair price for their products.

Nor are the farmers encouraged to develop subsistence farming, some for export with varied crops for their own survival. When agribusiness gets involved, farmers in the developing world become wage slaves on large scale corporate plantations.

The village farming cooperatives are a real market alternative to rapacious capitalism and its agribusiness operations, but these folks are forgotten at the WTO. They have neither local representatives nor state representatives. Nor has the Libertarian movement taken up their cause with few exceptions such as those of us on the Libertarian Left; Kevin Carson, Larry Gambone, and the Knappster, voices in the wilderness on this issue.

Think of the power that these small villages would have if rich American Libertarians who have oodles of cash were to champion their cause. But it won't happen because they aren't really Libertarians, just Republican hanger ons, more interested in privatizing public services than supporting real free markets in the real world. Because these markets are run by cooperatives and collectives, which runs counter to their individualist consumerist ideology.

The WTO talks stalled again today, and will not get anywhere because the issue to agribusiness is not the issue of sustainable farming, but of transforming the world into its supermarket as ADM brags.

And until we have fair trade that promotes open markets to farmer cooperatives in the developing world, Africa in particular, we will continue to have to feed them, and fund them, as they suffer the famines of Imperialism.

The Free Market In Children

Forget the beer and popcorn, here is a real example the right of parents to choose whats best for their children. Here is the reality of having a free market where parents can choose and the nanny state doesn't exist. Here is an example of having no state regulations, no state enforcement, and real freedom of choice. I can hear the conservatives cheering until they choke on this.....

UN highlights children's plight

One in 13 children in the developing world have lost a parent, it said

Hundreds of millions of children suffer discrimination and exploitation but are invisible to the world, the UN agency for children says in its annual report.

It said new laws are required to ensure that births are officially registered, and it also urged governments to do more to stop "abuse and exploitation".

Trafficking risk

The report said nearly two million children had entered the sex trade, 5.7 million were sold into slavery and 1.2 million were trafficked each year

The report said over half of the births in the developing world - apart from China - are not registered, meaning they are not recognised as citizens.

Without registered identity, they are unable to receive education, decent health care and other services. If they do not officially exist, it also means traffickers can make them "disappear" without fear of retribution.

The State of the World's Children 2006: Excluded and Invisible said exploited children were often overlooked in public debate or news stories.

Yep you can say that again.

How the NDP Blows it

The polls released on CPAC last night shows a serious decline in support for the NDP in Ontario and B.C. the hot spots that they are supposed to be fighting to win.

Now speculation has it that the significant, nope make that huge drop in the support for the NDP in Ontario is either the Buzz factor, or the Liberal Gun Ban.

Well folks its neither. It's the perennial problem of the liberal-Left and the NDP in particular, its called politeness. Yep they are to damn polite in debates.

So when debating a big mouth rightwhinger like say Ezra Le-Rant they sit quietly and try and score points by being reasonable, sounding reasonable, and not getting in your face. While Ezra or any other rightwhinger gets in your face and says the most outragous generalities about liberals and the left, and the spokesperson for the left sits there and takes it. Calmly they reply and get bulldozed over by the rightwhinger.

Its my pet peeve about liberal leftists in debates. The problem is that liberal leftists think that politics is the bloody Oxford debating society. That you score points by being clever. Well you actually have to open your mouth and say something to score points. And one of the failures of the NDP is that they don't.

Take for example last night on Mike Duffy's Countdown. We have Anne McLellan, Peter MacKay and Bill Blaikie debating. And Bill, Mr. Parlimentarian, sits there with this blank look on his face (you could almost see the cartoon squiggles of steam coming out of his ears) and doesn't butt in on the debate between Anne and Peter.

He waits. And waits. Finally the Duff asks him to speak, Bill starts and Duff asks him a question and he blows his cool and attacks Duff for interupting him. Opps faux pas, you don't criticize the moderator you attack your opponents.

Then Anne and Peter go at it hammer and tongs and on the screen between them is Bill staring out at us blank faced, and never ever said a word again. He just looked pissed off. Yep he just let them debate. The result,well here's what my pal Reg said;

I never thought....
Putting the a in smart
2005-12-13 20:49:47
I would ever feel sorry for Anne McLellan but if you just watched the absolute asskicking Peter MacKay just gave her over defense spending on Duffy's Countdown tonight, you know why I do.

Bill who? you ask, exactly. So what the hell is the NDP position on defense spending? Don't know cause Bill thought this was Oxford or the House of Commons. Where debate is regulated.

And he is not the only one. Its a major problem with the NDP communications (sic) team of Brad Lavigne and Jamey Heath. Whenever they are debating their counterparts on Don Newmans show, or the Duffs, they let the debate go between the Liberals and Tory's. They sit back politely and wait their turn. Though on CPAC the other night Brad did flip out and attacked, and attacked, with political pugilism.Atta boy Brad. Someone must have put an espresso in his Starbucks before the show.

But overall the NDP is never in the debates. They have a fear of luquacious interruptis. It's a historic problem with the NDP its why Ed Broadbent lost the debate and the election in 1988 when he sat back and let Mulroney and Turner punch it out over Free Trade. The issue was the NDP's and it was stolen by Turner. And all Ed did in the debate was sit on the sidelines slack jawed.

If the NDP wants to make any gains, let alone set the agenda of this election as they did in the spring sitting of parliment, its time to take the gloves off. Look into the camera and open your mouth and say something.


Other NDP Stories

Can't Get No Respect

The Face of the Evil Empire. Come to the dark side Canada.

Would you trust this man with your lumber?

The 'elephant next door' has heard the mouse that roared. US Amb-ass-ador Wilkins slaps Canada upside the head for his boss the War President.

Wilkins' wide-ranging speech covered just about every issue of contention between the U.S. and Canada.

The problem is if you watch his speech you need subtitles to understand what he is saying. Either it's his strong southern good old boy accent or the fact he had his bubba foot in his mouth.

And if he thinks he has chastised the Liberals well that was a tactical error of the highest order, especially during an election. Congratulations stupid you just influenced the election, more than the Washington Times could with their editorial supporting the Harper.

In a speech to the Canadian Club at Ottawa's historic Chateau Laurier Hotel, U.S. President George Bush's envoy to Canada accused Martin of trying to score cheap political points by bashing America. "Just think about this. What if one of our best friends criticized you directly and incorrectly almost relentlessly? What if that friend's agenda was to highlight your perceived flaws while avoiding mentioning your successes? What if that friend demanded respect but offered little in return?" Wilkins asked. Ok let me mention a success - Wal-Mart- 'nough said?!

Me thinks he doth protest too much....let's see he is speaking for an Administration that lied in order to conduct an illegal invasion of another country.

An Adminstration that continues to defy trade agreements with Canada.

An Administration that declared war on terror and invaded Afghanistan four years ago only to result in a city state surrounded by war lords, a 260% increase in opium production and left the countries defense to Canadian and NATO troops.

Are these incorrect or just flaws?

Now this Amb-ass-ador of the evil empire is well connected to the very lumber lobby that is screwing us. And as a good old southern bubba, with the confederate flag tattoed on his brain, of course he could still be smarting about the fact that the underground railroad to Canada was a success.

America owes us a lot, because without us they wouldn't be singing the Star Spangled Banner. We weren't always friends. So don't piss us off.

CTV Poll

Nope not one about the political parties but about us, about where Canadians get their election news. Blogs are behind radio, well shucks. But web sites almost match TV for being accessed for information in computer rich Canada. Mind you the fact this is a web site poll even if it for a TV network, sort of biases that anwser doesn't it. Quick vote now and vote often and blogs can beat out newspapers.

Where are you going first to follow the election campaign?

Newspapers		1060 votes	(11 %)
Television		4359 votes	(46 %)
Radio		345 votes	(4 %)
Websites		3262 votes	(34 %)
Blogs		533 votes	(6 %)
Total Votes: 9559

Taken for Granted

So it appears that none of the national party Leaders will be visiting Alberta soon.
Albertans frustrated by lack of attention. That's what happens when you are a Blue province, in a Red Country. If you pardon the American analogy.

It also reflects the cynicism of our national poltical party's over their chances of gaining a seat in the land of the democratic deficit. We have the only one party state in North America under King Ralph. And with the exception of two seats in Edmonton, fedrally we suffer the same indignity, being almost all Tory blue.

But is that any reason not to expect the national party leaders to visit here. There are some ridings in contention here, as I have mentioned before. But it appears that the Liberal strategy for Alberta is to sit this election out, except for Landslide Anne's Edmonton Centre riding, as I reported here the other day.

A Liberal spokesperson said leader Paul Martin is committed to travelling Canada as completely as possible and that he hopes to make Alberta part of that tour. Oh do. I hope you do plan to visit, perhaps by then you will have updated all your candidates pages on your web site so you know who you are visiting.

The NDP stands a good chance in a couple of Redmonton ridings that the Liberals have abandoned. Edmonton Strathcona and Edmonton East. While the Liberals are serious contenders in Mill Woods Beaumont.

An NDP spokesperson said Jack Layton's time is better spent in areas where the party holds some seats, but the leader hopes to make a stop in Alberta next week. Good that will be the first national leader to visit since the Green Party leader Jim Harris whistle stop last weekend.

But you know its bad when the National Party Leaders are more cynical about their chances here than the electorate. And abandoning Alberta is a dumb political move for the future.

Even the Harper is taking Alberta for granted. Sort of like he took his constiuency nomination, and later when he ran for the Alliance and refused to debate. His arrogance is showing now on the national stage. "Stephen Harper best serves the party by being in Ontario and Quebec because, at the end of the day, being in Alberta is not going to win us the government, and that's what this is about," said Stephen Carter, spokesperson for the Conservative party in Alberta. That is particualarly galling and a good reason to NOT vote Conservative. We Albertans are good at teaching lessons that way. We don't like to be taken for granted, specially by the one that brung ya to the dance.

The Return of Firewall Alberta

In a long rambling quote I heard on the radio yesterday, BQ leader Gilles Duceppe claimed that Alberta had more in common with Mexico than Quebec. Ok I said to myself, what the hell does that mean? He was talking about trade and trade links and mad cow. Uh huh right. So? And then he said this;Duceppe said Liberal Leader Paul Martin has refused to entertain the creation of trade zone "fire walls." He added these trade-zone fire walls would have shielded Quebec and other provinces from the fallout of mad cow, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Implying that Alberta was to blame for the BSE crisis, and the closing of the markets to safe healthy independeniste Quebecois cattle. But he said Firewall. He meant it to be around Alberta, not Quebec. Now the last guy to say that was Stephen Harper, and he said it about Alberta too, when he was President of the NCC, but he meant it as a form of psuedo-seperation.

Dr. Duceppe meant it as a way to quarantine Alberta phsyically as well as economically from the rest of the country during the BSE crisis. True the BSE crisis was centred in Alberta as a result of deregulation and privatization. However it did also occur in other provinces and in the US after they closed their border to us. Dr. Duceppe is implying that Alberta had been an economic Typhoid Mary.

Or perhaps he was just agreeing with the Old Harper. Nope read that quote again, it implies quarantine. Duceppe has just insulted every Albertan, and Canadian with that remark. Now this is certainly as big a gaffe as Beer and Popcorn. It was a throw away remark, a cheap shot at Alberta's expense. And a frightening one at that by its implications.

Wonder what the New Harper has to say about this, or the Alberta Conservative MP's or the ex-Reform Party Alberta MLA's like Firewall co-signor Ted Morton, or even King Ralph.

Harper Republican Lite

During the NFATA debate in Canada the Economist magazine on their front page refered to the Mulroney Government as Bleeding Heart Tory's, saying they were to the left of even the Democrats in the U.S. Todays Conservative party is nowhere close to the party of Mulroney, having been created as a right wing opposition to his bleeding heart conservatism. Harper's reply shows that his election focused Conservative party remains Republican Lite, ala John McCain.

Harper responds to Washington Times endorsement

Conservative leader Stephen Harper has responded to an opinion piece in the Washington Times in which Harper was called "the most pro-American leader in the Western world. Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative."

How About $500 for Dancing or Music Lessons

With the Harper announcement of a so called $500 tax credit for sports what does that really mean? Sound good on the surface but is it really for all 'sports'? Or just the expensive recreational sports like hockey and sking?

Cause as every soccer Mom knows, soccer is the cheapest sport around. Is it for Tae Kwon Do or boxing lessons? What about gymnastics or swimming or golf lessons? What about Rodeo entrance fees? Dancing is a physical activity, as well as a cultural one so will these fees be covered?Could be. Not sure what the Conservatives define as 'sports'?

Harper says sports builds character. Sure it does but so do music lessons, and learning to paint or sculpt, or to speak a second language, and other aspects of Culture, so why not a tax credit for them as well.

Ethnic dancing while subsidized by community groups still parents have to pay fees for this too. Playing a musical instrument costs parents money, for the instrument and lessons. What about second language lessons outside of the home? While not a team activity like sports, these too build character. And may lead to groups activities like singing in a Choir or being in a dance troupe. Or is this a little too multicultural for the Torys?

While sports are part of a better health program, which the Conservatives are focusing on, they are not the only activity that parents pay user fees for their children to participate in. Why aren't these fees covered as well?

Blogging Tory's Don't Get Day Care

It is obvious that it is Conservative men making the comments about the problem with the idea of publicly funded, certified, non-profit day care centres for being too institutional (subtext it's a prison) and a one size fits all without flexibility for working parents, and it won't work in rural Canada, and, and, and, and......

Tories offer Choice in Childcare says Bill McBeath, Conservative Organizer for Edmonton
Strange as it seems, the tory policy for childcare centres around... wait for it... choice! The fundamental idea that parents are the best people to raise children, and hsould be allowed to choose where government money (tax money, their money) get spent.The tory plan is more generous, more flexible, and more in touch with the many different families in Canada. Unlike the inflexible 9-5 institutional daycare plan of the Liberals, the Conservative plan allows parents who are shift workers, lower-income families, stay at home parents, and all families in general meet their child care needs.

When it isn't the Harper attacking public regulated day care it's one of the male conservatives in the blogosphere. Like my fellow Redmontonian; DazzlinDino of the Blogging Party of Canada. He says the following and it is the oft repeated criticism that the Conservatives are using as their messaging;

Let me make this clear, the federal daycare idea, the nine to five life, does not work for far too many people. How many of you would actually be able to take advantage of this. Can you tell your boss "Sorry, I can only work from 10-4 cause my kid is in daycare."? Think he is going to be looking for a replacement? If you live in a small community, will you benifit from this.....NO YOU WON't. I'm not a big fan of either idea, but there is no way a federal daycare would work, not in a private sector......

Yep he has obviously not sent his kids to daycare or aftercare. Lots of families work around their day care hours, parents adapting their work patterns to their family needs. Many working families who don't have the choice of having a well paid job that can support a stay at home parent, choose work that offers them at least the chance to have one parent off shift at home. Because there ARE NO PUBLIC DAY CARE SPACES FOR THEM.

Hmm I thought more and more employers were being flexible, thats all the rhetoric that unions face when negotiating for shift work. And speaking of the private sector it is Corporate Canada that has been derelict in its duty in providing on site day care for its employees. Been waiting for tax breaks I guess. Wait they have gotten tax breaks, they just didn't use them for day care for their workers. The CIBC got an innovation award this year from the Conference Board of Canada because they actually did create a flexible day care option for their workers. They were one of the only private corporations in Canada to do this hence the award. Whereas many public institutions are ahead of Corporate Canada, especially post seconday education institutions, when it comes to offering its staff and students day care.

Those of the professional classes are the ones who want a tax credit, not out of some wish to help single mothers or working class parents who have two jobs to make ends meet. But with typical conservative aplomb, they can afford to have a stay at home mom who gives up her lucrative career because dad has a lucrative career too, they believe they are being cheated and should have the same advantage of the family of two working parents or the single mother. As if being a member of the working poor or a single mother is a 'choice', like the one they made.

My wife and I have made made the descision that it is best for our family (and two daughters) if one of us were at home. My wife is a brilliant (and beautiful...hi sweety) person who completed a Physics Degree and Education Degree and gave up a career in teaching to raise our kids.We gave up her salary and day care tax breaks - but we did so gladly. It is our choice and all we ask is for our government to stay out of our business. Stop saying that we are ignorant. Stop comparing stay-at-home parents to people who would choose not to use a doctor for medical care - as if day care professionals can be a better parent. Political Staples

This is the same arguement made by right wingers about abortion. I remember debating a woman who had university law degree, but choose to stay at home and have children. She was a voracious opponent of a womans right to choose, abortion. Her husband was a vice president of a major oil company. She could afford to have a child, and she probably eventually had a nanny to. She insisted that a woman had no right to choose abortion, rather she should 'choose' to have the child and 'choose' to stay home and raise the child, like Ms. Professional did.

Fellow Redmonton blogger Idealistic Pragmatist also commented on Staples arguement and noted that it all comes down to a fetish of making a social issue into a 'personal issue'. A comment to his blog article clearly points out that for the majority of working Canadian families day care is a very real social neccesity, not a matter of personal choice.

But to be fair while many of the bloggers on this topic are men, its not just men who promote this false dichotomy between baby sitting and public day care. Edmonton Spruce Grove Conservative MP and psuedo-feminist, Rona Ambrose, who challenged the Liberal plan in the House as being a plan proposed by 'old white men',again identifies what makes the Tory plan different than the Liberals. It will pay for parents to leave their kids with babysitters, "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour" she told Mike Duffy on CTV today.

Conservative MP Rona Ambrose, who represents Edmonton-Spruce Grove, worked with Harper to write the Conservative child-care policy. She spoke with Larry Johnsrude, reporter/editor for edmontonjournal.com.
"We feel very strongly that our plan should be universal and equitable. The Liberal plan is regulated nine-to-five public day care through an public infrastructure and is a small percentage of the total child-care options being used by parents right now and is their last choice. Their first choice is for one of them to stay at home if they can afford to. Their second choice is (to leave their children) with a trusted neighbour or friend and the last choice is institutionalized care."

So it's ok to leave your kids with a stranger, the neighbour but not with trained certified early childhood educators. "Who knows better than parents how to raise their kids" says Rona. Well would you leave the education of your children to "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour" ? Of course not, unless like many social conservatives you choose home schooling. But home schooling is not a public education system. And neither is the Tory plan a national day care program.

If there are no public day care spaces then there is no real choice for parents. The choice is "a relative, a grandparent, or a neighbour". Which was the choice my parents had when the worked out of the home forty years ago. I was baby sat by my Baba and Dido, and my parents got their monthly family allowance cheque for my sister and I. Yep the Tory plan could be called Forward to the Past.

Whereas the NDP plan announced today will guarantee, by legislation, the creation of public regulated certified, non profit day care centres. And it will give parents real economic choice by giving a $1000 tax credit per child, while subsidizing child care space to the tune of $9000 per child. Now that is different, as the Canadian Tire ads say, than the Tory or Liberal Policies of non commitment to affordable public day care.

And in one of those twists of electoral fate, the NDP can thank Scott Reid for keeping day care in the news, with his arrogant remarks yesterday about Beer and Popcorn. Otherwise their announcement today would have been swamped by his party's Health Care Waiting Times Benchmark annoucement. Scott did the NDP a timely favour, another reason his boss will be chewing his ass off.


Also see:

Whose Family Values

Day Care

Defend Public Day Care

Giving Buzz da Boot

Straight Goods the first left of centre Canadian on-line journal has launched a humourous if vitorlic campaign against Liberal Luvin Buzz.

Buzz on Buzz:

Take the online
Straight Goods Survey
and qualify for a chance to win Straight Goods gear.

Now what's interesting is the buzzing on the left on line over all this. Rabble has taken an implicitly soft stand on Buzz and, as I reported here earlier, Straight Goods has taken offense over Buzz's finger in the wind politics.

Now Straight Goods , despite being it's predecesor, doesn't get the same buzz that Rabble does ,in the left and MSM, with its high profile owner Judy Rebick, and her pals like Jim Stanford of CAW. Nope they are the little on-line mag that could. So do I detect some political and commercial rivalry over this?

Rabble has attempted to be less partisan by running a Buzz commentary defending himself, while publishing columnists opposing Buzz, and its babble forum where all hell broke loose.

Straight Goods on the other hand has always identified itself with 'The Party'.They have columnists like Watkins and Tielman (who worked for the BCFL and the BC NDP),representing the old guard of the NDP. They sniffled over the upstarts at Rabble, Rebick and Stanford, who were the voice of the NPI, New Politics Initivative, which despite their support from Buzz, flamed out when it tried to reform the NDP.

This could be described as a classic confrontation between the old left and the new left in Canadian social democratic politics. Except I am not sure which is which. Since Mel Watkins founder of the left wing Waffle is onside with Straight Goods and Rebick and Stanford the NPI are on side with Buzz.

Both groups were the new left in the NDP in their day. And the NPI folks with the support of Buzz and the CAW disolved in favour of Jack Layton. See what I mean, its confusing without a program.

And while Jack is keeping tight lipped about all this, smart thing too, the NDP rank and file and their supporters have declared war on Buzz. Both the old left and new left. Should the NDP not gain seats in this election both will unite in blaming Buzz, no matter what they say or do now. And blaming Buzz will be giving him too much credit and it will be just the ego-boo he wants.

You see Buzz is all about, well Buzz. He loves all this attention he has been getting. He has become the ISSUE for the NDP in this election.He wants to be King Maker, whether in the Labour movement or the NDP, and failling that he would love to be King on his own island.

So if his overtures to Paul work out he can position himself against both Georgetti of the CLC and Layton of the NDP. Oh what a tangled web he weaves with nary a care for the result as long as it benefits Buzz.

More Buzz Stories

There is no I in Team

What a strange thing for a self professed Libertarian to say;"Harper said sports encourages teamwork"

There is no individualist "I" in team, specially sports teams. Its a, 'gasp', collective effort. No one 'star' can win the game, unless it's tennis. Suddenly Harper has mellowed, he believes that the cooperation and collectivism of sports "builds character".

Gone is the rabid individualist ideology of the past. No longer the anti-state liberaltarian, he is calling for more money from the State to go to parents to pay for user fees; which is just another form of taxation. Tories promise tax credit for kids' sports fees

My how the New Harper has changed from the Old Harper.

On being ‘libertarian’
“But I'm very libertarian in the sense that I believe in small government and, as a general rule, I don't believe in imposing values upon people.” (National Post, March 6, 2004)

Gee and wouldn't character building and team work be considered 'values'?

Economic conservatism, Harper says during an interview in his Calgary office, is libertarian in nature, emphasizing markets and choice. Libertarian conservatives work to dismantle the remaining elements of the interventionist state and move towards “a market society for the 21st century.” (Toronto Star, April 6, 1997)

Paying for user fees is the state intervening in the marketplace isn't it?

Scott Reid Conservative Commentator

"Duh' Oh"

Oh boy did the blogoshpere heat up yesterday when Liberal Party Communications (sic) Director, and the right hand of PM, Scott Reid came out with his comment that all the Harper Baby Bonus plan would do was provide for beer and popcorn for working parents. He probably thought he was being clever. I think he meant beer and peanuts. It was one of those gaffes that makes elections exciting on slow news days.

Anyways the off the cuff remark has caused a swirl of controversy, mainly fueled by the hypocritical Bloggin Tory's and our favorite 'f****ing moron'; Warren Kinsella. Yep much ado about nothing here folks.

Reid just sounded like a Conservative, or neo-con pundit many of whom have said similar things about the poor, folks on welfare, gays, the homeless, single mothers,women in general, immigrants, union folks, etc.etc. After all Ezra Levant has told us that 77% of Canadians are 'stupid'. So there. Take that. Those who live in glass houses........



View Related Articles

Another Train Jumps the Track

Leak from CN car forces evacuation of town block This is no longer NEWS its getting to be business as usual for the Continental National Disaster we call CN rail. It's now officially a weekly incident as it has been for the last six months. Just like clockwork. What was that old saying about the trains running on time, in this case its the trains being derailed on time, thanks to Just In Time flexibility for the bottom line. Just remember this when some neo-con says privatization or the private sector does it better than the public sector. Didn't have these problems when CN was still a crown corporation. But they are occuring after the privatization and sale of B.C. Rail to privatized CN.

More CN Privatization = Disasters Stories:

Le Revue Gauche

Red Between the Lines

Before Privatization




After Privatization



View Related Articles

The Election Blogs In the News

Oh lookee the Edmonton Journal has discovered the election blogs. And the fact that Jack doesn't. Though leader Jack Layton blogged during the June 2004 election, the NDP is the only big federal party now going without one.

Just Do It

King Ralph threatens again,Klein says he'll quit if Alta. Tories don't strongly support him next spring Just shut up and quit already. His backpedaling on smoking, refusal to outline what the Third Way for Healthcare really means, blathering about the Federal Liberals, backpedaling on not taking Fed money for Alberta Daycare, what anyone else would call lame duck leadership shows the King has gone mad in his counting house. Time for him to go.

Alberta Uber Alles

Ralphs World

Winter came and went

In Edmonton this week we had winter for three days, and now its gone. We have had an exceptionally warm November. In fact it was warmer than July according to Environment Canada.

For three days this week starting on Monday we had -20 c with a windchill of
-29 c, and snow.

As of Thursday we have had double digit highs at the opposite end of the scale hitting +19 c. And the snow is gone. Today as I write we are at +11 c. The forecast is more of the same for the next week before Xmas.

Some much for Winter it came and went. We are now as warm as we get in the Spring.

But wait it's still only Fall. Winter does not officially start until Solstice, December 21. Ah sigh, well one can dream he said humming "To Dream the Impossible Dream".

Workers Rights are Human Rights

Layton Endorses Workers’ Bill Of Rights on December 10 the day we celebrate the UN Declaration of Human Rights, written by a Canadian 30 years before we even had them entrenched in our law, including the right to organize and belong to a union which is still not a right in many provinces in Canada. Including Alberta.

So Mr. Labour Friendly Paul Martin where do you Stand?

Liberals Abandon Redmonton

The Liberals appear to have abandoned Redmonton figuring on a Tory landslide and neck and neck race in Edmonton Centre. Their website listing of Edmonton Candidates is empty with two exceptions. And its ten days into the election.

With the exceptions of Edmonton Centre Landslide Anne's constiuency. and Stephen Haroun running in Edmonton St. Albert, the other candidates have no profiles.

The other race that could be theirs is Edmonton Mill Woods-Beaumont, but all they have on their candidates page is a picture of their candidate, Amjarit Grewal.

Ditto for Nicole Martel their candidate in Edmonton East. Just a picture. She has a web page and they haven't connected to it, heck even I have done that here.

Ditto for these candidates

Edmonton--Sherwood Park	Ron Symic
Edmonton--Spruce Grove	Brad Enge

	Jim Jacuta

But at least they have a photos of them.

Ontheir page for Edmonton Leduc Liberal candidate Jim Jacuta's all they have is a silouette. Poor Jim. And its not like he hasn't run before, he is one of their high profile candidates. He ran against Deb Grey for Edmonton North.
Sheesh you'd think they would have a photo of him and his bio.

And no phone numbers to campaign offices, or web links, or bios or sfa on any of these links.

It appears that there is real disconnect between the Liberals national campaign and their candidates in Edmonton. More so than for instance their candidates in Calgary.

Federal candidates prepare for 8-week race
In Alberta, there are 28 seats to be filled – but little suspense over who will take most of them. In the 2004 election, all but two seats were won by the Conservatives, with the Liberals taking two Edmonton ridings. However, Edmonton-Beaumont MP David Kilgour who won as a Liberal, left the party and was sitting as an independent when the 38th Parliament wrapped up. He is not running again. That leaves Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, who represents Edmonton Centre, as the last Liberal standing in the province going into this election.

And here's the rub if you want to find out about the Liberal candidates in Redmonton, you can find them on the CBC web site. With pictures and bios, and web links. ( well they don't have a picture for Jim Jacuta but at least they don't use the stupid silouette). Everything that should be on the Liberal web site and isn't. Guess the Liberals figure that taxpayer funded Mothercorp should do their work for them.

It appears the Liberal candidates are suffering abandonment by the National campaign. Which does a disservice to not only all Edmontonians but all Albertans. So why would they expect us to vote for them if they can't even bother to campaign here seriously?!

In Harper Country, your choice for change this election is the NDP. They at least have candidate profiles on their web site.

Edmonton Strathcona Liberal MIA

Andy Hladyshevsky A stronger voice for Edmonton Strathcona!

The Liberal Candidate in Edmonton Strathcona appears to be running as an independent. His web site does not identify him as a Liberal let alone a member of Team Martin. No red maple leaf logos, no big L, nada, nothing.

And his website is still the one he had for his nomination as the Liberal candidate in Edmonton Strathcona, which he won.

The Liberals don't even know he is running for them since they have no candidate listing, as of today, on their candidate web site for Edmonton Strathcona. Opps.

Hey this is the end of Election week two. Over and done with and the Liberals have Andy running apparently for them in Edmonton Strathcona, but who knows...even CBC doesn't....

Note to Strategic Voters: I have said before this is going to be a two way race between Linda Duncan of the NDP and Rahim Jaffer of the Conservatives.

Ya'all vote Linda and we beat Rahim.

Homosexual Sex Marriage

Birds of a Feather

In this campaign Stephen Harper has Ralph Klein, and Jack Layton is discovering he's got Buzz.

Giving the Boot to Buzz