I don't support Mr. Harper but his party was elected to lead this minority parliament. Mr. Laytonon, Dion with the support of Gilles Duceppe, mean to seize control of parliament. What they are doing is not illegal but is somewhat specious in intent - especially coming so soon after a federal election.
Wrapping themselves in the Canadian Flag and citing the need for an economic stimulous package is but an excuse to gain power. Power is, after all, the holy grail of politics - not serving the nation.
Mr. Harper is no better than the opposition. He too plays partisan politics with a deadly resolve. He intended to end public financing for political parties not because the country cannot afford it, although he maintains fiscal realities led him to tis decision, but rather he saw an opportunity to cripple the opposition. The Liberals are in disarray with leadership problems and money problems. The Conservatives, on the other hand, are flush with private funding. Harper thought he could cut the legs out from under the opposition and look fiscall responsible. Instead, like operation market garden in WW II he reached for a bridge too far. He has painted himself into a corner of his own making and ought not be surprised the opposition is resorting to extraordinary methods to fight back.
The whole lot of them make me sick. They are not putting the interest of our great land first, but rather are struggling over the reigns of power. The arguing and yelling in the house has already reached a fever pitch and time is being wasted. Neither Harper, or the coalition is competely blameless in this situation but neither are they acting like adults entrusted with the honour of governing. I'd gladly throw the lot of them out and elect the Greens if it were practical. Canada derserves much better than this self-serving group of political hacks.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
What is Casino Rama thinking?
I am not a gambler except for the odd time on a cruise when I might waste twenty bucks in the slots once or twice during a holiday. I have never been to Casino Rama, near Orillia Ontario, but know they have excellent entertainment. Last Friday night, my son and travelled to Rama to see Roger Hodgson, of Supertramp fame. I found the signage on the highways leading to the Casino were sparse and we overshot Rama road. Why they don't have a large sign there indicating the next left is Casino Rama is beyond me. This ought to have been a warning to us.
When we arrived, I was astounded at the size of the complex. Arriving at night, we did not get a complete view of the place. We parked a long way back in the parking lot, thinking it would be easier to find the car later and proceeded into the Casino entrance. After the concert, we were funnelled out a different door but the parking lots were right there and we thought little of it. It was raining. We walked to where we thought we had parked but no car was to be found. We spent the next hour walking around the immense parking area before my son realized that there must be another parking area on the other side of the complex. He was right and although we were soaked, we finally found the car. I am very surprised that the casino has not seen fit to erect large signs with maps of the complex in the parking areas with a "you are here" designation. Also, there is no numbering on the light standards. There is no designation that one is parked in the west parking area, or whatever direction it is. There are no signs that advise one to remember where they parked. The whole thing is a disaster that could be easily rectified. I have written to Casino Rama customer relations to indicate my concerns, and my recommendations. The Casino entertainment complex itself is nicely designed and attractive and I just don't understand the signage and parking issue has been overlooked. Let's hope it is corrected soon before someone elses visit is ruined with a similar experience.
Malcolm Watts
When we arrived, I was astounded at the size of the complex. Arriving at night, we did not get a complete view of the place. We parked a long way back in the parking lot, thinking it would be easier to find the car later and proceeded into the Casino entrance. After the concert, we were funnelled out a different door but the parking lots were right there and we thought little of it. It was raining. We walked to where we thought we had parked but no car was to be found. We spent the next hour walking around the immense parking area before my son realized that there must be another parking area on the other side of the complex. He was right and although we were soaked, we finally found the car. I am very surprised that the casino has not seen fit to erect large signs with maps of the complex in the parking areas with a "you are here" designation. Also, there is no numbering on the light standards. There is no designation that one is parked in the west parking area, or whatever direction it is. There are no signs that advise one to remember where they parked. The whole thing is a disaster that could be easily rectified. I have written to Casino Rama customer relations to indicate my concerns, and my recommendations. The Casino entertainment complex itself is nicely designed and attractive and I just don't understand the signage and parking issue has been overlooked. Let's hope it is corrected soon before someone elses visit is ruined with a similar experience.
Malcolm Watts
Monday, October 20, 2008
The Canadian Federal Election 2008: What happened?
Few people I know expected much would change as the result of an election called in Sept. by conservative Prime Minister Stephan Harper. Indeed, little has changed except the Liberal party has been decimated and their leader, Stephan Dion, has been forced to resign. What happened?
Dion is to be commended for being upfront with Canadians and telling us we must seriously address the threat of climate change and environmental threat. Unfortunately, the campaign message was somewhat like Operation Market Garden in WWII – simply a bridge too far. The green shift program was not explained to individual Canadians in terms of what it would actually cost the nation collectively, and what it would cost the individual family. I pointed this fact out in August, well before the campaign, to a Liberal candidate who later ran and lost. Telling people to go to the green shift website for details is simply not good enough.
For his part, the prime Minister almost pulled off a majority government. His over-control of the campaign itself, gaffes by his ministers, and questions raised about Harper’s integrity after a staffer was found to have lifted speech material from the Australian PM several years ago caused the Tories to snatch minority from the jaws of majority. Canadians continue to be nervous of giving Harper a majority because they suspect a hidden reform agenda and I concur with these concerns.
The Green party elicited a lot of excitement but unless the country moves to a proportional representation system, the Greens will likely never be more than a fringe party. For her part, Canadians like green leader Elizabeth May but she continues to insist, for personal reasons, in running against deputy pm Peter MacKay in Central Nova in Nova Scotia. She needs to get herself a seat in the House of Commons - we need her voice there. The reality is she to accomplish this, she needs to parachute into a winnable riding. She did well in the national televised debate. Unfortunately, the greens lost their only seat in the house briefly held by a back-bencher from B.C. Elizabeth May has squandered a brief window of opportunity to keep a toe hold in parliament for her party.
Jack Layton did well for the NDP gaining twenty-some seats. Unfortunately history shows the NDP will never become more than a third party. An informal coalition of the Liberals and NDP will be needed in parliament to keep the conservatives under control but they cannot obstruct parliament too much. At the same time, they can’t be seen to be playing politics supporting Harper’s government.
In the end, Canada’s federal government will carry on much the same as it has for the past three years. The conservatives cannot push through their quasi-reform agenda and will have to provide a caretaker administration. To be fair, Stephan Harper has done a passable job over the past three years as a caretaker pm.
The Liberals will be lame ducks for the next year until they select a new leader. Keeping the knives away, whoever wins, will be critical but don’t hold your breath. The Liberals have a lot of wannabe pm’s in their midst that have a vested interest in back-room intrigue. The party’s treatment of Stephan Dion as leader was frankly disgraceful. He is a decent, intelligent man who could have done much to help Canada.
The state of the world economy has shaken Canada, although less so than other places. Still, governments will have to deal with much reduced income and higher costs.
It will be an interesting few years. Canadians expect parliamentarians to get to work and will have little patience for any party dragging us into another election in less than three years. They would prefer their parliamentarians work together for four years before taking another kick at the electoral can.
Malcolm Watts BA MSW
Visit my writing website
www.authorsden.com/malcolmwatts
Dion is to be commended for being upfront with Canadians and telling us we must seriously address the threat of climate change and environmental threat. Unfortunately, the campaign message was somewhat like Operation Market Garden in WWII – simply a bridge too far. The green shift program was not explained to individual Canadians in terms of what it would actually cost the nation collectively, and what it would cost the individual family. I pointed this fact out in August, well before the campaign, to a Liberal candidate who later ran and lost. Telling people to go to the green shift website for details is simply not good enough.
For his part, the prime Minister almost pulled off a majority government. His over-control of the campaign itself, gaffes by his ministers, and questions raised about Harper’s integrity after a staffer was found to have lifted speech material from the Australian PM several years ago caused the Tories to snatch minority from the jaws of majority. Canadians continue to be nervous of giving Harper a majority because they suspect a hidden reform agenda and I concur with these concerns.
The Green party elicited a lot of excitement but unless the country moves to a proportional representation system, the Greens will likely never be more than a fringe party. For her part, Canadians like green leader Elizabeth May but she continues to insist, for personal reasons, in running against deputy pm Peter MacKay in Central Nova in Nova Scotia. She needs to get herself a seat in the House of Commons - we need her voice there. The reality is she to accomplish this, she needs to parachute into a winnable riding. She did well in the national televised debate. Unfortunately, the greens lost their only seat in the house briefly held by a back-bencher from B.C. Elizabeth May has squandered a brief window of opportunity to keep a toe hold in parliament for her party.
Jack Layton did well for the NDP gaining twenty-some seats. Unfortunately history shows the NDP will never become more than a third party. An informal coalition of the Liberals and NDP will be needed in parliament to keep the conservatives under control but they cannot obstruct parliament too much. At the same time, they can’t be seen to be playing politics supporting Harper’s government.
In the end, Canada’s federal government will carry on much the same as it has for the past three years. The conservatives cannot push through their quasi-reform agenda and will have to provide a caretaker administration. To be fair, Stephan Harper has done a passable job over the past three years as a caretaker pm.
The Liberals will be lame ducks for the next year until they select a new leader. Keeping the knives away, whoever wins, will be critical but don’t hold your breath. The Liberals have a lot of wannabe pm’s in their midst that have a vested interest in back-room intrigue. The party’s treatment of Stephan Dion as leader was frankly disgraceful. He is a decent, intelligent man who could have done much to help Canada.
The state of the world economy has shaken Canada, although less so than other places. Still, governments will have to deal with much reduced income and higher costs.
It will be an interesting few years. Canadians expect parliamentarians to get to work and will have little patience for any party dragging us into another election in less than three years. They would prefer their parliamentarians work together for four years before taking another kick at the electoral can.
Malcolm Watts BA MSW
Visit my writing website
www.authorsden.com/malcolmwatts
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Movie Review: Relgilous
Movie Review: Religulous
Lionsgate Films 2008
Starring Bill Maher
Director: Larry Charles
Movie Review: Religulous
Lionsgate Films 2008
Starring Bill Maher
Director: Larry Charles
A movie examining religion in this way is long overdue. The reason is that religion continues to be the great sacred cow that is not to be discussed, particularly with regard to the really hard questions.
Bill Maher starts off carefully and steadily makes a case for disbelief as he proceeds through many interviews with clergy and believers. All the while, there are good laughs that are mostly good hearted rather than barbed and sarcastic. The scenes in the Jesusland theme park in Orlando, and when he is kicked out of both the Vatican and the seat of the Mormon religion in Salt Lake City are particularly good. He carefully deconstructs the Mormon religion for us as only the latest, except for Scientology, in a long line of falsehoods foisted upon mankind.
It is clear from the many interviews Maher conducts in the film that religious people essentially dodge the tough questions. When tough questions are asked, they resort to such specious arguments such as we cannot understand God’s mind, or meaning or plan. God, and his purpose, is simply so far beyond mortal understanding. As Maher points out, whether Jonah lived for three days in the belly of a whale or if it was a great fish is irrelevant when the real question is how could either scenario have ever happened at all. Of course it couldn’t but the religious people interviewed simply accept the story because it is in the Bible – along with the talking serpent in the Garden of Eden and many other stories that are essentially myths and fairy tales.
Bill Maher does well in the film of asking probing questions without becoming disagreeable. He obviously was well prepared with relevant background information and having this information available enriched his ability to have facts to support his opinion. He has included little known facts such as the theme of Virgin birth and violent death of a prophet is a one repeated throughout civilizations long prior to the story of Christ. Maher disputes the very existence of an historical figure called Christ asserting there is simply no evidence he ever existed, except in the mind of the men who wrote things down, albeit imperfectly. He notes that only two of the four gospels of the New Testament talk about Christ’s virgin birth and considers this a rather serious oversight of a significant fact of Christ’s life, if indeed it were true at all, and the biographers were accurate in their reporting.
The troubling intrusion of religion into political life of the U.S. Senate and Congress and White House, as well as countries such as Iran is explored. Parliamentarians in Holland are struggling with the growing influence and intrusiveness of Islam in their country – perhaps the most libertarian culture in the world.
Bill Maher states that for himself, he simply doesn’t know whether God exists, but maintains this is a very remote possibility.
Despite his good natured demeanour throughout the film, Maher does conclude the film with an edgy warning that religion is dangerous because it robs people of the ability to think and question and encourages them to settle for what are clearly the wrong answers for the worlds problems, as well as their own. He then challenges the sixteen per-cent of Americans who state they have not religious affiliation, or desire to have one, to come forward as a significant silent minority and make their disbelief known.
This is an important film and I would challenge every church, and believer, to see and discuss the film. Such discussions ought to include not only their own congregations but also disbelieving outsiders. Of course, this is unlikely to happen, but perhaps a few churches will take on the challenge. If they cannot, then indeed the case is made that their religious beliefs are little more than a house of cards they are afraid might be blown down under the gentle, and comical breath, of a modern day court fool such as Bill Maher.
I give this film 4 out of 5
Malcolm Watts MSW
Lionsgate Films 2008
Starring Bill Maher
Director: Larry Charles
Movie Review: Religulous
Lionsgate Films 2008
Starring Bill Maher
Director: Larry Charles
A movie examining religion in this way is long overdue. The reason is that religion continues to be the great sacred cow that is not to be discussed, particularly with regard to the really hard questions.
Bill Maher starts off carefully and steadily makes a case for disbelief as he proceeds through many interviews with clergy and believers. All the while, there are good laughs that are mostly good hearted rather than barbed and sarcastic. The scenes in the Jesusland theme park in Orlando, and when he is kicked out of both the Vatican and the seat of the Mormon religion in Salt Lake City are particularly good. He carefully deconstructs the Mormon religion for us as only the latest, except for Scientology, in a long line of falsehoods foisted upon mankind.
It is clear from the many interviews Maher conducts in the film that religious people essentially dodge the tough questions. When tough questions are asked, they resort to such specious arguments such as we cannot understand God’s mind, or meaning or plan. God, and his purpose, is simply so far beyond mortal understanding. As Maher points out, whether Jonah lived for three days in the belly of a whale or if it was a great fish is irrelevant when the real question is how could either scenario have ever happened at all. Of course it couldn’t but the religious people interviewed simply accept the story because it is in the Bible – along with the talking serpent in the Garden of Eden and many other stories that are essentially myths and fairy tales.
Bill Maher does well in the film of asking probing questions without becoming disagreeable. He obviously was well prepared with relevant background information and having this information available enriched his ability to have facts to support his opinion. He has included little known facts such as the theme of Virgin birth and violent death of a prophet is a one repeated throughout civilizations long prior to the story of Christ. Maher disputes the very existence of an historical figure called Christ asserting there is simply no evidence he ever existed, except in the mind of the men who wrote things down, albeit imperfectly. He notes that only two of the four gospels of the New Testament talk about Christ’s virgin birth and considers this a rather serious oversight of a significant fact of Christ’s life, if indeed it were true at all, and the biographers were accurate in their reporting.
The troubling intrusion of religion into political life of the U.S. Senate and Congress and White House, as well as countries such as Iran is explored. Parliamentarians in Holland are struggling with the growing influence and intrusiveness of Islam in their country – perhaps the most libertarian culture in the world.
Bill Maher states that for himself, he simply doesn’t know whether God exists, but maintains this is a very remote possibility.
Despite his good natured demeanour throughout the film, Maher does conclude the film with an edgy warning that religion is dangerous because it robs people of the ability to think and question and encourages them to settle for what are clearly the wrong answers for the worlds problems, as well as their own. He then challenges the sixteen per-cent of Americans who state they have not religious affiliation, or desire to have one, to come forward as a significant silent minority and make their disbelief known.
This is an important film and I would challenge every church, and believer, to see and discuss the film. Such discussions ought to include not only their own congregations but also disbelieving outsiders. Of course, this is unlikely to happen, but perhaps a few churches will take on the challenge. If they cannot, then indeed the case is made that their religious beliefs are little more than a house of cards they are afraid might be blown down under the gentle, and comical breath, of a modern day court fool such as Bill Maher.
I give this film 4 out of 5
Malcolm Watts MSW
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Political knitipicking distracts from important issues
I normally admire Bob Rae, but in recent times he is revealing himself as a down and dirty political animal determined to win at any cost. His abandonment of the NDP to join the Liberal party was one such decision. He wants to be on the winning team - nothing wrong with that I guess. But his news conference today regarding Harper's 2003 statement in parliament about Canada's participation in Iraq war in 2003 being lifted from the Australian PM's speech two days previous is sickening.
I am the last to guy to let Harper off the hook, but in this case, clearly a staff speechwriter cut corners, lifted the material and passed it on to the boss. Bob Rae carrying on as if Harper has been exposed as a criminal is the kind of tawdry, nasty, and meanspirited behavior that turns people off the Liberal message, and off politics in general. Dion has jumped on the wagon and is calling for Harper to be "thrown out" (by whom and to where is unclear). Canadians are mostly decent people and while I personally don't much care for the Tory message, I don't like the idea of using cheap shots to defeat them. If that is what politics is about in our country today, we might as well become another U.S. state.
I am the last to guy to let Harper off the hook, but in this case, clearly a staff speechwriter cut corners, lifted the material and passed it on to the boss. Bob Rae carrying on as if Harper has been exposed as a criminal is the kind of tawdry, nasty, and meanspirited behavior that turns people off the Liberal message, and off politics in general. Dion has jumped on the wagon and is calling for Harper to be "thrown out" (by whom and to where is unclear). Canadians are mostly decent people and while I personally don't much care for the Tory message, I don't like the idea of using cheap shots to defeat them. If that is what politics is about in our country today, we might as well become another U.S. state.
Friday, September 26, 2008
The Harper Team - not ready for prime time
Steven Harper called an election despite his governments own legislation that set an election date for fall of 2009. Why did he do this - political expediency. They want a majority and the polls seemed good. Nothing wrong with that - it's politics. The election campaign has demonstrated, however, that while the Tories might do O.K. as a minority government, they are not ready for a full fledged mandate from the people to implement a conservative agenda.
The gaffes and comments of several conservative ministers, off the tight leash of Mr. Harper, have been revealing. The Listeria comment, the staffer's condescending comments towards a native person, reveal that too many of conservative team remain insensitive, uncaring and apparently unable to appreciate the complexity of issues and governance.
An example is The Harper solution to youth crime - toughen sentences and send serious young offenders to prison to do serious time. It is true there are young thugs with guns that need to be dealt with effectively, but just sending them to adult prison (the university of crime) is not the answer. What kind of people will they be when they get out and they will get out eventually, but Harper doesn't appreciate this. The tough-love, jail them all solution has not worked in the U.S. - why would it work here?
The Harper government has performed better that I would have predicted at caretaking the nation over the past three years. Still, I don't think they have the insight and judgement required to use a majority mandate in an effective and thoughtful manner. At the same time, the opposition is in disarray and Stephan Dion, an intelligent and sensitive man, has simply not caught on with the electorate.
The outcome of the election is likely to be another Tory minority. That will be fine while the opposition sort themselves for the next election. The Harper team are not ready for a majority mandate from the electorate. After the election, all parties must get back to work governing and legislating collectively. It hasn't worked so bad for the past three years -- it can work again.
The gaffes and comments of several conservative ministers, off the tight leash of Mr. Harper, have been revealing. The Listeria comment, the staffer's condescending comments towards a native person, reveal that too many of conservative team remain insensitive, uncaring and apparently unable to appreciate the complexity of issues and governance.
An example is The Harper solution to youth crime - toughen sentences and send serious young offenders to prison to do serious time. It is true there are young thugs with guns that need to be dealt with effectively, but just sending them to adult prison (the university of crime) is not the answer. What kind of people will they be when they get out and they will get out eventually, but Harper doesn't appreciate this. The tough-love, jail them all solution has not worked in the U.S. - why would it work here?
The Harper government has performed better that I would have predicted at caretaking the nation over the past three years. Still, I don't think they have the insight and judgement required to use a majority mandate in an effective and thoughtful manner. At the same time, the opposition is in disarray and Stephan Dion, an intelligent and sensitive man, has simply not caught on with the electorate.
The outcome of the election is likely to be another Tory minority. That will be fine while the opposition sort themselves for the next election. The Harper team are not ready for a majority mandate from the electorate. After the election, all parties must get back to work governing and legislating collectively. It hasn't worked so bad for the past three years -- it can work again.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Political Sniping - Enough Already on both sides of the border.
Both the U.S. and Canada find themselves in the midst of elections in this fall of 2008. The problem is, the messages each party have are often lost with the sniping, dirty tricks, and character attacks. Television networks love to pit one party member against the other. The result is too often pointless finger pointing, and the issues are lost. What we see is an extension of the sniping and back-biting from the house of commons that continues to reach new lows all the time. Members of parliament, and their party minions, ought to be compelled to conduct themselves with decorum and at least a degree of respect. One way to do this would be to focus on issues and what can be done in the future with the cooperation of all parties. No one party has all the answers - parliamentarians are paid well to represent their ridings and provide leadership. Lets get back to basics here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
