Barfy slogans and pithy platitudes bombarded Manitobans without pause or purpose this last month.
Good Jobs, Steady Growth (downwards?)
Imagine Better.
For a Better Manitoba.
<insert Gag Tag>
10 times the spoiled ballot count was the response... oh, and a Manitoba Party that, despite the shambles, damned near hit the Green party numbers in ridings they ran candidates in.
Seems like, in Manitoba's provincial elections, we are promised the change we already know. Let that logic sink in a bit.
One leader ran (beautifully) on 'hey, if you don't like him, vote for me!' Another tried 'if you don't like anyone, vote for me, ('cause I am unlike anyone else you have ever seen...)'
So, despite the biggest say nothing (intelligible) electoral platforms in recent Manitoba election history, we got the pendulum swing results this Hegelian keystone meat grinder reliably spits out. Hard left, hard right, hard left... and back to hard right.
The middle, normally the turf cut of the Liberals, got lost in the absolute gong show that was the Bokhari and friends campaign. Despite fielding an impressive line-up of candidates (for the most part), and despite attracting some truly nifty new volunteers, nothing and no-one could overcome Rana's... being Rana.
Not even the energy inspired by Justin could mask the bizarre sideshow that Rana put on for us. The Liberal leader displayed the qualities that caused a great whack of her party to run for the hills after less than three months of her leadership. Liberal support in Fort Rouge followed soon after.
Now Manitobans face another 4 years of pendulum politics which, if left unchecked, allows corruption, waste, lack of vision, incompetence, and the absence of public service to thrive (albeit with new bestest friends benefitting.) Instead of putting Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition in power, we put the folks who had nothing better to do than wait it out.
We have a party that lies without conscience leading the opposition now. We have a Liberal leader who cannot understand her own policies, let alone the sitting governments. These are the voices the Province must rely on to keep the mega-PC government in check.
Bloody wonderful.
Sadly, despite having some gifted, intelligent media persons in our midst, the biggest headlines were not about the failures of the parties to enunciate the end of pendulum politics through better governance frameworks. Oh no. The headlines were predominantly inspired by twitter. And twits who tweeted twoubling untwuths. Straight up Fudd-like.
So while the lowest common denominator shrank to 140 characters, the real stories concerning Manitobans were left off the headlines, and out of print. Nothing left now but to remind editors that tweets are character limited for a reason.
Folks, there is public corruption in our midst. Big corruption. It is rampant, it is fairly obvious, and it is knowable. The stories don't fit on a smartphone screen, perhaps. Yet there was a time that journalists and editors coveted the shaggy-dog, multi-layer stories that made a difference.
There was a time when Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition knew their job, and did it fairly well. Please tell me one scandal the PC's brought into the sunlight during their long tenure as the official opposition. Just one, I challenge you.
Give me one example of the Liberal Leader digging into a story and coming up with a problem, let alone a solution, that didn't get reduced to some stupid agist remark. (What is with the hate-on at the MLP for anyone over 50? Daddy issues much?)
Please, please tell me one story that shows either the PC's or Liberals actually did their jobs in opposition. Show me that they understand the details and issues at the bottom of any scandal or underperforming department whatsoever.
Please show me that they actually deserved to govern, or remain in opposition. So I can sleep at night a wee bit better. Because right now, the Westminster model has been replaced with a vicious, uncaring, ineffective pendulum.
And it is swinging over our heads once again.
Ciao, Bellas.
Thursday, 28 April 2016
Friday, 12 December 2014
Frozen MB Students Rank Behind...?
Last year, it was the coldest fricken' winter, like... ever.
Now, when you live in Victoria, or Denver, or even Toronto, the 'worst winter ever' is not such a life-and-death matter.
Welcome to the Winnipeg School Division (WSD), where the coldest winter temperatures ever can maim you, fast, even kill you quicker than any other mid-size city on earth.
One thing Winnipeger's know, our weather is no laughing matter if you don't handle it correctly. And oh boy, did the WSD ever blow it last year, says the latest news.
See, last year, Scrappy Mike Babinsky, the long-time school trustee from WSD, found out that our kids were left on the side of the road in the dead of winter. Stranded, outside, waiting for a school bus that just didn't come. Again, and again, and again...
The worst. winter. ever. with kids allegedly left outside up to 90 minutes, waiting... waiting...* Know how fast skin freezes in that extreme cold? Of course you do, through experience, right? Even the image hurts, badly.
Oh, and these kids are all under 12. Just for colour.
This kind of winter famously maims, and kills, kids who are stranded outside in it. Got that image firmly in your mind? Ok, then let's proceed.
Scrappy Mike the trustee decided to do something about what he had been told. In public, and given that it is a public safety issue, obviously appropriately so.
So Mike went to the public school board meeting, duly filed a written notice of motion to address this matter in the public, and tried to do the right thing. Publicly. Like, with all of us.
Why so publicly, you ask?
Because otherwise, the WSD board's business is conducted 'in camera', aka. outside the reach of the public. Either publicly, or completely private. Like, huge-fine-if-you-ever-disclose-a-word kind of private.
Our kids safety, their suffering, and the failures at the Division leading to their suffering, in Scrappy Mike's world, are public matters. Guess what? In my anonymous little world, same thing.
And in the majority of the (NDP... cough...) WSD trustee's world..?
Apparently, this is a big secret deal to them. So the matter was moved almost entirely to their secret meeting. As much as they could, they threw the matter behind closed doors.
Even Mike's written notice of motion was scrubbed from the public minutes.
(WTF???)
The resulting fuss has been all over the news. Marty Gold is tackling it, and even the Free Press's Nick Martin has looked up from his football channels long enough to write a few lines about it. Lots of hullabaloo. Lots of quotes from labour council sponsored trustees. High drama, indeed.
However.
HEY, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN IN DIRE RISK OF INJURY*, and even death.
Being swept under the secret rug, then... Mike's motion voted down by the (Labour Council... cough...) trustees in a secret meeting.
Voted down. A motion to make sure our kids don't freeze in the dead of the-worst-winter-ever waiting for buses that seem to never come... voted down.
I couldn't make this up. Too bizarre, right?
So Mike got mad, and took the matter public in a different way. Go figure.
Big-shot lawyer and chair of the WSD board Mark Wasyliw has publicly attacked Scrappy Mike for his actions. Other trustees, same. Very disturbing, ok, but not particularly surprising, sadly.
Voting down a motion to keep kids safe, though? Hiding the matter from the public by removing the motion from the minutes? This is... bloody shocking, right? I mean, am I over-reacting here?
Hey, our kids' safety is not a private affair, WSD school board. Not even close. They are OUR KIDS*. And we are the public, you see?
Marty Gold points out, in his latest podcast (welcome back, Marty-cast!) that board chair Wasyliw may face legal sanctions for altering those public minutes. If summarily convicted, it is possible that he will not remain on the board.
And yet Mike got the public sanction by the Board. Seriously, I cannot make this up.
PLUS*!
This attempted cover-up (is that too harsh?) has all been done to, apparently, protect division staff from the implications of publicly addressing the matter. To keep the staff safe.
I kid you not. In WSD, their students rank behind some airy-fairy notion of protecting staff from some theoretical liability under FIPA.
So folks, when you are griping about Manitoba students ranking behind other provinces in test scores... are you surprised? If staff of any enterprise are not held to account for failures, then failure becomes a way of life. Not student failure, but staff, which of course leads to student failure. In all kinds of ways.
Think about this: who are the raison d'être for the schools, anyway? The staff, or the students?
(Answer: I suppose it depends on who runs the board.)
Definitely not a good news story. Except for the Scappy Mike bit.
G-d bless you, Scrappy Mike.
(Dig, Marty. DIG*.)
Ciao
*Bold stylin' inspired by The Black Rod blog. All rights belong to them.
Now, when you live in Victoria, or Denver, or even Toronto, the 'worst winter ever' is not such a life-and-death matter.
Welcome to the Winnipeg School Division (WSD), where the coldest winter temperatures ever can maim you, fast, even kill you quicker than any other mid-size city on earth.
One thing Winnipeger's know, our weather is no laughing matter if you don't handle it correctly. And oh boy, did the WSD ever blow it last year, says the latest news.
See, last year, Scrappy Mike Babinsky, the long-time school trustee from WSD, found out that our kids were left on the side of the road in the dead of winter. Stranded, outside, waiting for a school bus that just didn't come. Again, and again, and again...
The worst. winter. ever. with kids allegedly left outside up to 90 minutes, waiting... waiting...* Know how fast skin freezes in that extreme cold? Of course you do, through experience, right? Even the image hurts, badly.
Oh, and these kids are all under 12. Just for colour.
This kind of winter famously maims, and kills, kids who are stranded outside in it. Got that image firmly in your mind? Ok, then let's proceed.
Scrappy Mike the trustee decided to do something about what he had been told. In public, and given that it is a public safety issue, obviously appropriately so.
So Mike went to the public school board meeting, duly filed a written notice of motion to address this matter in the public, and tried to do the right thing. Publicly. Like, with all of us.
Why so publicly, you ask?
Because otherwise, the WSD board's business is conducted 'in camera', aka. outside the reach of the public. Either publicly, or completely private. Like, huge-fine-if-you-ever-disclose-a-word kind of private.
Our kids safety, their suffering, and the failures at the Division leading to their suffering, in Scrappy Mike's world, are public matters. Guess what? In my anonymous little world, same thing.
And in the majority of the (NDP... cough...) WSD trustee's world..?
Apparently, this is a big secret deal to them. So the matter was moved almost entirely to their secret meeting. As much as they could, they threw the matter behind closed doors.
Even Mike's written notice of motion was scrubbed from the public minutes.
(WTF???)
The resulting fuss has been all over the news. Marty Gold is tackling it, and even the Free Press's Nick Martin has looked up from his football channels long enough to write a few lines about it. Lots of hullabaloo. Lots of quotes from labour council sponsored trustees. High drama, indeed.
However.
HEY, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN IN DIRE RISK OF INJURY*, and even death.
Being swept under the secret rug, then... Mike's motion voted down by the (Labour Council... cough...) trustees in a secret meeting.
Voted down. A motion to make sure our kids don't freeze in the dead of the-worst-winter-ever waiting for buses that seem to never come... voted down.
I couldn't make this up. Too bizarre, right?
So Mike got mad, and took the matter public in a different way. Go figure.
Big-shot lawyer and chair of the WSD board Mark Wasyliw has publicly attacked Scrappy Mike for his actions. Other trustees, same. Very disturbing, ok, but not particularly surprising, sadly.
Voting down a motion to keep kids safe, though? Hiding the matter from the public by removing the motion from the minutes? This is... bloody shocking, right? I mean, am I over-reacting here?
Hey, our kids' safety is not a private affair, WSD school board. Not even close. They are OUR KIDS*. And we are the public, you see?
Marty Gold points out, in his latest podcast (welcome back, Marty-cast!) that board chair Wasyliw may face legal sanctions for altering those public minutes. If summarily convicted, it is possible that he will not remain on the board.
And yet Mike got the public sanction by the Board. Seriously, I cannot make this up.
PLUS*!
This attempted cover-up (is that too harsh?) has all been done to, apparently, protect division staff from the implications of publicly addressing the matter. To keep the staff safe.
I kid you not. In WSD, their students rank behind some airy-fairy notion of protecting staff from some theoretical liability under FIPA.
So folks, when you are griping about Manitoba students ranking behind other provinces in test scores... are you surprised? If staff of any enterprise are not held to account for failures, then failure becomes a way of life. Not student failure, but staff, which of course leads to student failure. In all kinds of ways.
Think about this: who are the raison d'être for the schools, anyway? The staff, or the students?
(Answer: I suppose it depends on who runs the board.)
Definitely not a good news story. Except for the Scappy Mike bit.
G-d bless you, Scrappy Mike.
(Dig, Marty. DIG*.)
Ciao
*Bold stylin' inspired by The Black Rod blog. All rights belong to them.
Sunday, 21 September 2014
Union Support in Civic Elections
(Sitting quietly, drumming my fingers, watching for signs that folks 'get' the importance of the Union nod in Winnipeg's Civic politics...)
Hey, hi. Miss me?
So, as usual, the content on this page is my anonymous opinion only.
Here we go...
If you do a bad thing (and get caught...), get yourself a lawyer to represent you. Lawyers' services are for sale, still largely following the guidelines laid down by the Sophists in ancient Greece. You can buy representation, even if your cause is... somewhat dubious. Such is our system, and we have been sticking to it.
An agent who is for, and only for, their 'client' will make a stand in opposition to ideals, 'the good', evidence, or whatever else is flung their client's way. The process of defending the seemingly indefensible requires the criminal defence lawyer to transcend the normal bounds of common decency. They are all-in on the side of their client, and damn the goody-goody torpedoes.
Unions are similar in that way. They serve only those who pay them. Right?
In Winnipeg, the collective political will of the various Unions gets legs through the Labour Council. Also in Winnipeg, some civic candidates get their legs through the Labour Council's 'endorsement'.
Now, listen, I am not going to rant on the Union's right to political action. They have it, they use it, and they break no law or guidelines by their simply exercising this right. Go to town, Union bosses (within the boundaries of the rules, of course.)
I am going to rant a wee bit about what their participation means to civic elections, though.
Let's take a School Board election, say, Winnipeg School Board. Governed by elected Trustees, right? In WSD, there are nine elected Trustees, so five votes gets you a majority. Five votes, should they be stacked and whipped, controls the largest single employer in the Province (pretty sure they are). Five votes drive a $400 million annual budget in the direction they see fit.
Five votes.
... and how many Trustee Candidates are the Union's backing in WSD this fine 2014 civic election?
What, do I need to offer a prize? Of course the answer is five. Go see their page on Facebook. Google Winnipeg Labour Council Facebook, look at their mid-June posting of the officially endorsed candidates.
Lets unpack the implications of a Union controlling a School Board through a 'Union-backed' stacked and whipped Board of School Trustees.
Recall that a Union, like a criminal defence lawyer, has only one client: its own membership. They exist solely to serve their dues-paying members. Who within our schools are members of the Union? Better to ask who isn't, much shorter list...
So, if practically every paid grown-up in the school system is tied to a Union, then... who is supposed to represent the families? Who speaks for the taxpayers? Who fights for the rights of students? Who has the 'trust' of every non-union stakeholder involved and invested in the schools?
The Board of 'Trustees'... obviously.
So now ask yourself, what do Union-backed Trustees need to do in order to earn and keep their Union-backing? Do they... oh, I dunno... need to support the Union in return? Hmmm? What do you think, eh self?
So, about the kerfluffle that Trustee Babinsky raised this week.
Check it out (click me!)
You have to understand the frustration that a real community-representing Trustee endures when faced with a stacked, whipped Board filled with 'Union-endorsed' Trustees. They know the duty of care a Trustee takes on when elected by the families in their Ward. It must be heart-breaking to sit at the Board table and watch such an obvious abdication of the role all around them. They vote against the Union-backed tide again, and again, always with the same sad result.
Their tongues are cut out by a $50,000.00 penalty for breaking the gag order imposed in the secret 'in camera' board meetings. Their hearts are ripped out as vote after voted gets whipped, stacked, and shoved through the secret 'Committee of the Whole.' Their voice is silenced by, it appears, some pretty high-level tampering with the Board minutes (c'mon Minister, investigate it.)
So now you have a slack anonymous blogger unpacking the implications of Union-backed Civic campaigns. I had to comment after Mike went public, because...
The Newspapers aren't. Nary a word on the subject of the whipped voting record so far. Freaky.
AND
The PC party isn't saying anything publicly about this matter. That is just plain weirdo.
AND
What about the MB Liberals?
Don't even ask me that.
Don't even ask me that.
Wise reader, I know you have many opinions about the Mayoral race. Oh, and you could talk my ear off about the Councillors, I know, I know...
But heck, damn, people, these are our kids. Maybe we need to focus on this issue just a wee bit more. Maybe I need to go through the voting record (what little is recorded...) and show you the pattern... ummm..
I better actually get on that.
(Oh... and just for colour, who is the Chair of the secret Committee of the Whole at WSD...?
Why, Trustee Mark Wasyliw, former NDP Federal Candidate... and big time Criminal Defence lawyer.
WOOOO-GAAAA)
Ciao
Hey, hi. Miss me?
So, as usual, the content on this page is my anonymous opinion only.
Here we go...
If you do a bad thing (and get caught...), get yourself a lawyer to represent you. Lawyers' services are for sale, still largely following the guidelines laid down by the Sophists in ancient Greece. You can buy representation, even if your cause is... somewhat dubious. Such is our system, and we have been sticking to it.
An agent who is for, and only for, their 'client' will make a stand in opposition to ideals, 'the good', evidence, or whatever else is flung their client's way. The process of defending the seemingly indefensible requires the criminal defence lawyer to transcend the normal bounds of common decency. They are all-in on the side of their client, and damn the goody-goody torpedoes.
Unions are similar in that way. They serve only those who pay them. Right?
In Winnipeg, the collective political will of the various Unions gets legs through the Labour Council. Also in Winnipeg, some civic candidates get their legs through the Labour Council's 'endorsement'.
Now, listen, I am not going to rant on the Union's right to political action. They have it, they use it, and they break no law or guidelines by their simply exercising this right. Go to town, Union bosses (within the boundaries of the rules, of course.)
I am going to rant a wee bit about what their participation means to civic elections, though.
Let's take a School Board election, say, Winnipeg School Board. Governed by elected Trustees, right? In WSD, there are nine elected Trustees, so five votes gets you a majority. Five votes, should they be stacked and whipped, controls the largest single employer in the Province (pretty sure they are). Five votes drive a $400 million annual budget in the direction they see fit.
Five votes.
... and how many Trustee Candidates are the Union's backing in WSD this fine 2014 civic election?
What, do I need to offer a prize? Of course the answer is five. Go see their page on Facebook. Google Winnipeg Labour Council Facebook, look at their mid-June posting of the officially endorsed candidates.
Lets unpack the implications of a Union controlling a School Board through a 'Union-backed' stacked and whipped Board of School Trustees.
Recall that a Union, like a criminal defence lawyer, has only one client: its own membership. They exist solely to serve their dues-paying members. Who within our schools are members of the Union? Better to ask who isn't, much shorter list...
So, if practically every paid grown-up in the school system is tied to a Union, then... who is supposed to represent the families? Who speaks for the taxpayers? Who fights for the rights of students? Who has the 'trust' of every non-union stakeholder involved and invested in the schools?
The Board of 'Trustees'... obviously.
So now ask yourself, what do Union-backed Trustees need to do in order to earn and keep their Union-backing? Do they... oh, I dunno... need to support the Union in return? Hmmm? What do you think, eh self?
So, about the kerfluffle that Trustee Babinsky raised this week.
Check it out (click me!)
You have to understand the frustration that a real community-representing Trustee endures when faced with a stacked, whipped Board filled with 'Union-endorsed' Trustees. They know the duty of care a Trustee takes on when elected by the families in their Ward. It must be heart-breaking to sit at the Board table and watch such an obvious abdication of the role all around them. They vote against the Union-backed tide again, and again, always with the same sad result.
Their tongues are cut out by a $50,000.00 penalty for breaking the gag order imposed in the secret 'in camera' board meetings. Their hearts are ripped out as vote after voted gets whipped, stacked, and shoved through the secret 'Committee of the Whole.' Their voice is silenced by, it appears, some pretty high-level tampering with the Board minutes (c'mon Minister, investigate it.)
So now you have a slack anonymous blogger unpacking the implications of Union-backed Civic campaigns. I had to comment after Mike went public, because...
The Newspapers aren't. Nary a word on the subject of the whipped voting record so far. Freaky.
AND
The PC party isn't saying anything publicly about this matter. That is just plain weirdo.
AND
What about the MB Liberals?
Don't even ask me that.
Don't even ask me that.
Wise reader, I know you have many opinions about the Mayoral race. Oh, and you could talk my ear off about the Councillors, I know, I know...
But heck, damn, people, these are our kids. Maybe we need to focus on this issue just a wee bit more. Maybe I need to go through the voting record (what little is recorded...) and show you the pattern... ummm..
I better actually get on that.
(Oh... and just for colour, who is the Chair of the secret Committee of the Whole at WSD...?
Why, Trustee Mark Wasyliw, former NDP Federal Candidate... and big time Criminal Defence lawyer.
WOOOO-GAAAA)
Ciao
Thursday, 30 January 2014
Charles Adler Loves Rana...?
(Ummm...
Ok, so maybe the headline looked misleadingly romantic, sorry. But I love the catchy headlines, right?)
Charles Adler, and certain other (cough* Winnipeg Sun staff... cough*) journalists have been lovin' them some Rana lately.
Q: Cute, or creepy?
I mean, sure, Rana is, as Charles points out in yesterday's interview, charming as all get out when you first meet her. She actually bats her eyes, which is a lost art that breathes a little energy into the new political air. Today's Liberals being all about the 'new way' of politics, seems to fit.
But still... does a pair of fluttering lashes or a big hug or enormous smile really get you this kind of positive publicity from the crotchety old right-wing reporters in Peg-city?
I mean, look, Charles is smart. Like, super-smart. Not a word drops from his lips that isn't moulded, shaped, and directed with deadly serious purpose. Guy is Mensa-smart in the mouth. We all know that.
Sooo...
How can Chuck spew the kind of bullshit about the party's 'increase under Rana's leadership' that he did yesterday?
(Answer: guided missile aimed at the NDP wafflers.)
How does he accept the above false premise, then ask if Rana is considering the effect of the 'Liberal surge under Rana' on the NDP and PC parties?
(Answer: guided missile aimed at wafflers generally, and strategic voters. Smart cluster bomb... oh, Charles!)
Why wouldn't he ask about the increase in Liberal Party support _after_ Rana was elected?
(Answer: shaping the message.)
So, should I go on?
I know some say that any press is good press. Sure, and Charles is a neat guy, so cool, let's chat with him.
But folks, to be so blatantly used in the manner in which the new Liberal Leader has been in these interviews....
I gotta call it. Creepy. Not cute. I have spoken.
So, now, let's please looks at facts.
Threehundredeight.com is a national treasure. Go there, check it up.
Once there, you will find a lovely chart which details the Provincial party support of the last few years. Yes, Manitoba is neatly labled and well treated. Science based stuff, distilled down to a grade 2 level graph for us.
Look at the Manitoba picture (its a bloody picture, folks, so kinda hard to misunderstand.) Hint: the Manitoba Liberals are the Red line.
Go ahead, look at it. You will see, in crayon-coloured simple-line-drawing truth, that:
1. The polls show MB Liberal Party support rise right after Justin is elected, and the PST debate got real. Rise starts around April, goes until about Sept.
2. Then it stops rising, and flatlines.
So the increase in support, if it is to be tied to a change in leadership, is clearly tied to Justin's leadership. Like, crayon-clearly, right?
The Liberals 'new political way', with bold ideas and even bolder decisions started in April of 2013 (dude, the Senate turfed from caucus? Masterful. But the new commission for choosing non-partisan Senators...? Thank you.)
Rises, rises... and then... Rana was elected. And then it is as flat as the farm.
It seems everyone has been holding their breath since Rana was elected. +20% have not decided to vote for anyone, yet. This is significant. Flat-line support. Which is fine, Manitoban's are bright. Kind of Missouri-North, show me people.
The by-elections prove what I am saying (and the frickin' crayon-coloured line drawing shows), as they mirror the polls despite the cold weather, gas explosions, and mondo-apthy. Almost bang on the prediction (remember, the Grits poll lower in the country than the city, but had the advantage of some momentum in Arthur-Virden.)
No increase in support since Rana was elected.
Chuck lied.
(Let that sink in.)
Chuck... lied...
Charles Adler does not get this stuff wrong. Too frickin' smart. No, folks, he lied. On purpose, or knowing Chuck, likely on multi-purpose. Mensa-mouth can hit more than one target at a time.
It will be interesting to see what the new MB Liberal Party leadership comes up with, and how folks eventually respond to it. Could be a lots of ink in 2014, and perhaps a lot fewer undecideds.
And lets leave it at that, ok Charles?
(You kooky guy.)
Ciao
Ok, so maybe the headline looked misleadingly romantic, sorry. But I love the catchy headlines, right?)
Charles Adler, and certain other (cough* Winnipeg Sun staff... cough*) journalists have been lovin' them some Rana lately.
Q: Cute, or creepy?
I mean, sure, Rana is, as Charles points out in yesterday's interview, charming as all get out when you first meet her. She actually bats her eyes, which is a lost art that breathes a little energy into the new political air. Today's Liberals being all about the 'new way' of politics, seems to fit.
But still... does a pair of fluttering lashes or a big hug or enormous smile really get you this kind of positive publicity from the crotchety old right-wing reporters in Peg-city?
I mean, look, Charles is smart. Like, super-smart. Not a word drops from his lips that isn't moulded, shaped, and directed with deadly serious purpose. Guy is Mensa-smart in the mouth. We all know that.
Sooo...
How can Chuck spew the kind of bullshit about the party's 'increase under Rana's leadership' that he did yesterday?
(Answer: guided missile aimed at the NDP wafflers.)
How does he accept the above false premise, then ask if Rana is considering the effect of the 'Liberal surge under Rana' on the NDP and PC parties?
(Answer: guided missile aimed at wafflers generally, and strategic voters. Smart cluster bomb... oh, Charles!)
Why wouldn't he ask about the increase in Liberal Party support _after_ Rana was elected?
(Answer: shaping the message.)
So, should I go on?
I know some say that any press is good press. Sure, and Charles is a neat guy, so cool, let's chat with him.
But folks, to be so blatantly used in the manner in which the new Liberal Leader has been in these interviews....
I gotta call it. Creepy. Not cute. I have spoken.
So, now, let's please looks at facts.
Threehundredeight.com is a national treasure. Go there, check it up.
Once there, you will find a lovely chart which details the Provincial party support of the last few years. Yes, Manitoba is neatly labled and well treated. Science based stuff, distilled down to a grade 2 level graph for us.
Look at the Manitoba picture (its a bloody picture, folks, so kinda hard to misunderstand.) Hint: the Manitoba Liberals are the Red line.
Go ahead, look at it. You will see, in crayon-coloured simple-line-drawing truth, that:
1. The polls show MB Liberal Party support rise right after Justin is elected, and the PST debate got real. Rise starts around April, goes until about Sept.
2. Then it stops rising, and flatlines.
So the increase in support, if it is to be tied to a change in leadership, is clearly tied to Justin's leadership. Like, crayon-clearly, right?
The Liberals 'new political way', with bold ideas and even bolder decisions started in April of 2013 (dude, the Senate turfed from caucus? Masterful. But the new commission for choosing non-partisan Senators...? Thank you.)
Rises, rises... and then... Rana was elected. And then it is as flat as the farm.
It seems everyone has been holding their breath since Rana was elected. +20% have not decided to vote for anyone, yet. This is significant. Flat-line support. Which is fine, Manitoban's are bright. Kind of Missouri-North, show me people.
The by-elections prove what I am saying (and the frickin' crayon-coloured line drawing shows), as they mirror the polls despite the cold weather, gas explosions, and mondo-apthy. Almost bang on the prediction (remember, the Grits poll lower in the country than the city, but had the advantage of some momentum in Arthur-Virden.)
No increase in support since Rana was elected.
Chuck lied.
(Let that sink in.)
Chuck... lied...
Charles Adler does not get this stuff wrong. Too frickin' smart. No, folks, he lied. On purpose, or knowing Chuck, likely on multi-purpose. Mensa-mouth can hit more than one target at a time.
It will be interesting to see what the new MB Liberal Party leadership comes up with, and how folks eventually respond to it. Could be a lots of ink in 2014, and perhaps a lot fewer undecideds.
And lets leave it at that, ok Charles?
(You kooky guy.)
Ciao
Monday, 2 December 2013
Happy Holidays... Infidel!
You know me.
I am, more than anything else (MB politically,) dedicated to seeing the Kings and Queens of Orange supplanted by another worthy Government-in-waiting. They have wandered into absolute power territory, with the expected results. Has to be stopped, right? For our children's sake, etc. You know.
To that end, I was even willing to gather under a big tent filled with Green, Red, and Blue people. I really was... (at least until we fix the first-past-the-post nightmare. Then have at'er, plurality of parties.)
But... oh bother. Brian, honestly, how could we share a tent after this?
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/seasons-greetings----even-to-infidel-atheists-pallister-234034381.html
Now, you might be thinking that I'm going to saw on the 'infidel atheist' matter.
I am not. Barely care.
However, if you listen to the video around the 9 to 13 second marks, the fella hoping to be the leader of one of the most multi-cultural environs in the world does not know what 'infidel atheists' celebrate this time of year.
Whosa-whatsa??
It isn't that he has 'his own' way, which hey, I'm glad for him about.
It is that he says he does not know what a very, very large portion of the population of Manitoba (non-believers-like-his-believers) could possibly be celebrating this time of year.
Ummm...
Oh, bother.
So now we have to consider if Brian is fit for the office he seeks. Is he...
... ready to lead?
(Back at'ya, Pro Cons.)
Yes, he is ready to lead, but not the Province of Manitoba. Not all of us, together. Just... some of us, you know, those whom he understands.
Ahem.
Maybe we should ask Rana if she knows what 'infidel atheists' celebrate this time of year. Just sayin'...
(And hey, Free Press, Brian is not running for the office of Prime Minister.
If you are going to show a pie chart to do with the religious affiliations of the populace he wishes to lead, try Manitoba maybe? Wow.)
Ciao.
I am, more than anything else (MB politically,) dedicated to seeing the Kings and Queens of Orange supplanted by another worthy Government-in-waiting. They have wandered into absolute power territory, with the expected results. Has to be stopped, right? For our children's sake, etc. You know.
To that end, I was even willing to gather under a big tent filled with Green, Red, and Blue people. I really was... (at least until we fix the first-past-the-post nightmare. Then have at'er, plurality of parties.)
But... oh bother. Brian, honestly, how could we share a tent after this?
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/seasons-greetings----even-to-infidel-atheists-pallister-234034381.html
Now, you might be thinking that I'm going to saw on the 'infidel atheist' matter.
I am not. Barely care.
However, if you listen to the video around the 9 to 13 second marks, the fella hoping to be the leader of one of the most multi-cultural environs in the world does not know what 'infidel atheists' celebrate this time of year.
Whosa-whatsa??
It isn't that he has 'his own' way, which hey, I'm glad for him about.
It is that he says he does not know what a very, very large portion of the population of Manitoba (non-believers-like-his-believers) could possibly be celebrating this time of year.
Ummm...
Oh, bother.
So now we have to consider if Brian is fit for the office he seeks. Is he...
... ready to lead?
(Back at'ya, Pro Cons.)
Yes, he is ready to lead, but not the Province of Manitoba. Not all of us, together. Just... some of us, you know, those whom he understands.
Ahem.
Maybe we should ask Rana if she knows what 'infidel atheists' celebrate this time of year. Just sayin'...
(And hey, Free Press, Brian is not running for the office of Prime Minister.
If you are going to show a pie chart to do with the religious affiliations of the populace he wishes to lead, try Manitoba maybe? Wow.)
Ciao.
Wednesday, 30 October 2013
NDP Supports Preferential Ballot... (for themselves)
Recall the Premier, in the last election, said that the preferential ballot system was too complicated for Manitobans.
(sigh.)
Then recall Ms. Mary Agnes Welch, intrepid Freep reporter, writing:
"Better way to vote
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/incumbent-no-shoo-in-for-ndp-nomination-121764559.html
So.
Q1: Is it easier for members, or not easier for members?
Q2: Is it only easier if you are an NDP member?
Q3: Is it only easier for nominations?
Q4: WTF?
Mr. Premier, sir, with respect, I have to unpack this a little at your expense.
So hey, does anyone know the coolest power of the preferential ballot? Goes like this:
WE DON'T LIKE YOU (this much)
The real power of the preferential ballot is found in one's ability to say 'stop!' Stop doing that to me / us / them / yourselves. Stop that, rascals, rogues, rapscallions.
See, when you vote in first-past-the-post, you are only allowed to say who you like the best. "X marks my besties, my buddies, my brethren." And hey, that's ok, because we should get to say who we support, and say it clearly.
Some pundits say that the power of the preferential ballot rests 'next in line', or who you support kinda, sorta, I mean if you really pushed me to say.
Hogwash, I say.
Lukewarm is neither hot nor cold. It is tepid, kinda, sorta. It isn't bad, but it isn't best.
Best is saying:
"Ok, look, I get it. You want to promise the moon and stars to your supporters. But to do that, you have to take from me and mine (you win, we lose.)
I am not stupid, and I see what you are doing. I will try to stop you by giving you the worst ranking possible. I am going to try to stop what you are doing, as is my right and my responsibility."
Only... today, despite clearly being your responsibility, it is not your right. You may not punish putrid policy with the lowest possible ranking because the Premier of Manitoba will not let you.
Hmmm... let that sink in. The Premier of Manitoba will not let you. Because, he says, you are not bright enough to figure out a ranking system (poor dear.) Pappa Greg, keeping you safe from the implications of your low IQ. What a pip, eh 'wot?
But that is not true, is it, sir? Mr. Premier, you know that Manitoba has the requisite IQ score to figure out who hurts them, and who doesn't. You know full well the legions of 'have-nots' your regime has screwed, lied to, led on, and leveraged are not suffering intellectually, but rather socio-economically.
In short, sir, I ask you to tell the brave truth: that with Preferential balloting, the NDP strategy goes dark. The polar politics of first-past-the-post puts you in power. A preferential system may (may!) not.
You chose to keep Manitobans gagged so you can stay in power the old fashioned way.
End of story, right, sir?
Ok, fair enough. Thanks for being honest.
The NDP is supportive of better forms of Democracy, but not for non-NDP members.
Because they are too stoo-pid? No, of course not. Just the opposite, right?
Lord above, Manitoba. Stand up for your rights. Insist on preferential balloting.
Stop making a mess for your children to clean up.
My friends, now is the time to turn up the heat on this issue. Do not wait for the election. Pile on the pressure now, so the back-room policy wonks get an early whiff of your incessancy. Bang the drum of decent democracy now, later, and onwards to that better future.
Ok? Seriously, lets go.
(Hey, newly minted leader Manitoba Liberal Rana Bokhari. Good to see you, welcome to the party.
This is kinda important, above.)
Ciao.
(sigh.)
Then recall Ms. Mary Agnes Welch, intrepid Freep reporter, writing:
"Better way to vote
THE provincial NDP hopes a better way to vote will avoid the chaos that reigned in the Maples during the 2009 leadership race.
Back then, the Maples was the scene of one of the most controversial and cramped delegate selection meetings. Hundreds of new members, most from the city's growing Indo-Canadian community, jammed into a neighbourhood school to cast their ballots for leadership hopefuls Steve Ashton or Greg Selinger. Some got shut out and the meeting took hours.
At Sunday's nomination vote, the party will test-drive a preferential ballot for the first time. Party members will be able to drop in any time during the day to vote, and ballots will ask members to rank each candidate in order of preference. That avoids what could be a daylong voting process, assuming one of the three candidates doesn't get a majority on the first ballot.
The three candidates for the nomination support the system, saying it's much easier for members..."
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/incumbent-no-shoo-in-for-ndp-nomination-121764559.html
So.
Q1: Is it easier for members, or not easier for members?
Q2: Is it only easier if you are an NDP member?
Q3: Is it only easier for nominations?
Q4: WTF?
Mr. Premier, sir, with respect, I have to unpack this a little at your expense.
So hey, does anyone know the coolest power of the preferential ballot? Goes like this:
WE DON'T LIKE YOU (this much)
The real power of the preferential ballot is found in one's ability to say 'stop!' Stop doing that to me / us / them / yourselves. Stop that, rascals, rogues, rapscallions.
See, when you vote in first-past-the-post, you are only allowed to say who you like the best. "X marks my besties, my buddies, my brethren." And hey, that's ok, because we should get to say who we support, and say it clearly.
Some pundits say that the power of the preferential ballot rests 'next in line', or who you support kinda, sorta, I mean if you really pushed me to say.
Hogwash, I say.
Lukewarm is neither hot nor cold. It is tepid, kinda, sorta. It isn't bad, but it isn't best.
Best is saying:
"Ok, look, I get it. You want to promise the moon and stars to your supporters. But to do that, you have to take from me and mine (you win, we lose.)
I am not stupid, and I see what you are doing. I will try to stop you by giving you the worst ranking possible. I am going to try to stop what you are doing, as is my right and my responsibility."
Only... today, despite clearly being your responsibility, it is not your right. You may not punish putrid policy with the lowest possible ranking because the Premier of Manitoba will not let you.
Hmmm... let that sink in. The Premier of Manitoba will not let you. Because, he says, you are not bright enough to figure out a ranking system (poor dear.) Pappa Greg, keeping you safe from the implications of your low IQ. What a pip, eh 'wot?
But that is not true, is it, sir? Mr. Premier, you know that Manitoba has the requisite IQ score to figure out who hurts them, and who doesn't. You know full well the legions of 'have-nots' your regime has screwed, lied to, led on, and leveraged are not suffering intellectually, but rather socio-economically.
In short, sir, I ask you to tell the brave truth: that with Preferential balloting, the NDP strategy goes dark. The polar politics of first-past-the-post puts you in power. A preferential system may (may!) not.
You chose to keep Manitobans gagged so you can stay in power the old fashioned way.
End of story, right, sir?
Ok, fair enough. Thanks for being honest.
The NDP is supportive of better forms of Democracy, but not for non-NDP members.
Because they are too stoo-pid? No, of course not. Just the opposite, right?
Lord above, Manitoba. Stand up for your rights. Insist on preferential balloting.
Stop making a mess for your children to clean up.
My friends, now is the time to turn up the heat on this issue. Do not wait for the election. Pile on the pressure now, so the back-room policy wonks get an early whiff of your incessancy. Bang the drum of decent democracy now, later, and onwards to that better future.
Ok? Seriously, lets go.
(Hey, newly minted leader Manitoba Liberal Rana Bokhari. Good to see you, welcome to the party.
This is kinda important, above.)
Ciao.
Friday, 25 October 2013
Pot Laws: Criminal Training Still Unspoken
So no-one talks about the affects on kids that Harper's current pot regime has. Guess it is up to me to get this conversation-ball a-rolling. No problem, dear Reader.
Scene: Justin blindsided by Brandon Mom concerned her daughter gets pot when legalized.
What Justin said: Essentially 'it will be harder for kids to get when legal' projection argument.
(Maybe it will, maybe it won't, actually.)
What he should have said: "(Read below, oh faithful one.)"
"Dear Pot-Concerned Brandon Mom,
Your daughter, if she buys pot today, gets great school-supported training in criminal behaviour. I'm assuming that is not a good thing for you. If it is a good thing then stop reading. Now.
If you don't want school kids (including yours) trained in criminal behaviour at school, then let's talk about how precious gets her pot today, under the Harper Government (TM).
There is a party Saturday. Little Suzy's friends ask her if she can hook them up with some smokables. "'Natch", Suzy says. "Just give me some money, Honies."
Your daughter then secretly contacts a known criminal, a school mate. She makes inquiries as to the availability, quality, and price of said desired dope. If pleased, she makes a meet and monetarily supports the criminal education of her peer, and also strengthens the tie between organized crime and the school.
If you don't know the above then.... pull your head out of your ass, Mom. Seriously, pull it out.
Done? Ok, now listen closely.
Mom... I have good news, and bad news.
The good news is that your daughter likely gets high grade weed. I'm guessing local herb (go, Manitoba!), price is decent. Doubtful she gets ripped off in an alley by some desperate street kid (after all, her contact is still in school, right?) A pretty safe transaction, by criminal standards.
...and the bad news?
A criminal organization, likely gang controlled, is supplying your daughter and her friends. Don't worry though, right, because they care about your daughter. It's all 'family' and stuff up at the biker club house, you know? They really, really care about Suzy. Not even kidding.
Think of it this way, Mom:
A high-level criminal has a huge flow of pot crop harvested each month. He (or she...) and his buddies love making the Benjamins, and selling plants worth $2000.00 per pound gets dem' lotsa' money. They supply everyone who has da' money. They supply school kids, University students, hippies, oldies, Politicians... everyone. If you have money, you get pot through the system.
Now one day the distribution arm of the criminal organization had a problem: not enough pot due to a crop failure and a major bust. They must choose between supplying the high school, the old folks home, or parliament. Oh, dilemma, who will get the straight trippin' dope, yo'?
Duh. The school. Long-term thinking and addiction go hand in hand, right? These kids are your local biker's precious cargo. Much, much money to be made there.
So, Mom, your sweet young daughter is not just another customer to Billy the Biker. She is his Gold client, his bread and butter forever, his top priority. Isn't that grand?
And.
Your sweet Suzy and her friend (the Grade 10 pot dealer) represent a new army of law-breakin', money making peons who can (and likely will) fatten the criminal coffers for years to come. Mr. Grade 10 soon becomes a man with ambitions, and men with ambitions in organized crime follow a fairly reliable path.
He might take the place of 'school liaison' when he graduates, supplying the next generation. He might rise higher, supplying all school liaisons in a region, or a School Division, or a city... (you know its a business, right, Mom? I mean, with franchises, territories, and all that jazz. Right?)
And Mr. Grade 10 is Suzy's friend... well, business associate, really. Either way, they are tight. Nice, huh?
And!
Sweet Suzy, ever the lovin' friend, hooks up her peeps and they share the cost of the bag full'o dope, right? She gets them all involved. But she will almost certainly introduce her bestest friend to Mr. Grade 10 ('cause she is straight chillin' dog. You can totally trust her, we're besties...)
AND!!!
Your sweet Suzy has received a couple years of in-school training in the general dynamic for benefiting from and enabling organized criminal behaviour. Don't be a rat, don't be a square, never narc, never tell your parents, don't pay PST, yadda yadda.
These messages are drilled into Suzy's little head again and again. Her secret friends need Suzy to follow a script, stay with the program, keep coming with the money. After all, without Suzy and her peeps, there is no market. No market, no money, no more organized crime.
Really, no more organized crime (well, this little slice, anyhow.) These guys are not religiously driven, ok? They make money, they work. No money, no work.
So, yeah, about that little slice.
$Billions. That at least you know, right Mom?
Maybe you even have friends who make big, big money 'cause pot be illegal, Mom?"
(GASP!!!)
Well, maybe she does, maybe she doesn't. I really don't know for sure. But, man, that interview sure waked like a duck trying to keep the pond water fresh. You know?
The regular press focuses in on how funny it is that famous people smoke pot. And that's cool, I guess, it is kinda funny. Sadly, what the regular press seems to have forgotten about Pot is that in all such matters, follow the money.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Regular press, when did you lose your nerve on Pot and stop following the money? Oh... right... biker gangs and politically connected persons and... ah, ok. You are afraid, 'natch. Cool.
Now, to be fair (and real) not all the current pot supply can be traced back to gangs. Some folks are gentle-person farmers growing their Ganga in peaceful pursuits. They don't pay taxes, though... which is not really fair. That aside, they are nice people with good lives and connections in churches, community groups, non-profits, government.....
Government. The folks who build the Marxian sub-structure upon which the pot black market dynamic rests.
Are there connections between pot growers and government? Um, yes, it is necessarily the case. If you don't know this, then again I have to ask if there is a slight feeling of over-fullness and discomfort in the back of your pants... and if it is dark and quiet in your world...
Prohibition is driven by money, plain and simple. Was that way with liquor in the States, is that way with Pot in Canada. Money, money, money, money, and money. Tax money, hidden money, tomorrow's money, bribe money, hush money, extortion for money, love of money. This is a business, and this business is all about money.
Prohibitionists used the services of a recently successful suffragette movement to ban alcohol under the 'we care' banner. It worked. Worked with pot, too (same thing, different nice ladies, people like certain Mom's from Brandon... right Mom?)
Underneath these banners is MONEY. Every time, all the time.
Well, money and power. Sure, power too.
(Hmmm... who has power over the market for Pot in Canada... hmmm...)
That's the kind of thing I wish Justin had said.
Recently an NDP blogger and I chatted, and he said he was not a direct stakeholder in this whole affair. (Meaning, he didn't smoke pot.)
If he thinks the above does not form a direct link to his life and the lives of those he loves, then I wonder...
Ciao
Scene: Justin blindsided by Brandon Mom concerned her daughter gets pot when legalized.
What Justin said: Essentially 'it will be harder for kids to get when legal' projection argument.
(Maybe it will, maybe it won't, actually.)
What he should have said: "(Read below, oh faithful one.)"
"Dear Pot-Concerned Brandon Mom,
Your daughter, if she buys pot today, gets great school-supported training in criminal behaviour. I'm assuming that is not a good thing for you. If it is a good thing then stop reading. Now.
If you don't want school kids (including yours) trained in criminal behaviour at school, then let's talk about how precious gets her pot today, under the Harper Government (TM).
There is a party Saturday. Little Suzy's friends ask her if she can hook them up with some smokables. "'Natch", Suzy says. "Just give me some money, Honies."
Your daughter then secretly contacts a known criminal, a school mate. She makes inquiries as to the availability, quality, and price of said desired dope. If pleased, she makes a meet and monetarily supports the criminal education of her peer, and also strengthens the tie between organized crime and the school.
If you don't know the above then.... pull your head out of your ass, Mom. Seriously, pull it out.
Done? Ok, now listen closely.
Mom... I have good news, and bad news.
The good news is that your daughter likely gets high grade weed. I'm guessing local herb (go, Manitoba!), price is decent. Doubtful she gets ripped off in an alley by some desperate street kid (after all, her contact is still in school, right?) A pretty safe transaction, by criminal standards.
...and the bad news?
A criminal organization, likely gang controlled, is supplying your daughter and her friends. Don't worry though, right, because they care about your daughter. It's all 'family' and stuff up at the biker club house, you know? They really, really care about Suzy. Not even kidding.
Think of it this way, Mom:
A high-level criminal has a huge flow of pot crop harvested each month. He (or she...) and his buddies love making the Benjamins, and selling plants worth $2000.00 per pound gets dem' lotsa' money. They supply everyone who has da' money. They supply school kids, University students, hippies, oldies, Politicians... everyone. If you have money, you get pot through the system.
Now one day the distribution arm of the criminal organization had a problem: not enough pot due to a crop failure and a major bust. They must choose between supplying the high school, the old folks home, or parliament. Oh, dilemma, who will get the straight trippin' dope, yo'?
Duh. The school. Long-term thinking and addiction go hand in hand, right? These kids are your local biker's precious cargo. Much, much money to be made there.
So, Mom, your sweet young daughter is not just another customer to Billy the Biker. She is his Gold client, his bread and butter forever, his top priority. Isn't that grand?
And.
Your sweet Suzy and her friend (the Grade 10 pot dealer) represent a new army of law-breakin', money making peons who can (and likely will) fatten the criminal coffers for years to come. Mr. Grade 10 soon becomes a man with ambitions, and men with ambitions in organized crime follow a fairly reliable path.
He might take the place of 'school liaison' when he graduates, supplying the next generation. He might rise higher, supplying all school liaisons in a region, or a School Division, or a city... (you know its a business, right, Mom? I mean, with franchises, territories, and all that jazz. Right?)
And Mr. Grade 10 is Suzy's friend... well, business associate, really. Either way, they are tight. Nice, huh?
And!
Sweet Suzy, ever the lovin' friend, hooks up her peeps and they share the cost of the bag full'o dope, right? She gets them all involved. But she will almost certainly introduce her bestest friend to Mr. Grade 10 ('cause she is straight chillin' dog. You can totally trust her, we're besties...)
AND!!!
Your sweet Suzy has received a couple years of in-school training in the general dynamic for benefiting from and enabling organized criminal behaviour. Don't be a rat, don't be a square, never narc, never tell your parents, don't pay PST, yadda yadda.
These messages are drilled into Suzy's little head again and again. Her secret friends need Suzy to follow a script, stay with the program, keep coming with the money. After all, without Suzy and her peeps, there is no market. No market, no money, no more organized crime.
Really, no more organized crime (well, this little slice, anyhow.) These guys are not religiously driven, ok? They make money, they work. No money, no work.
So, yeah, about that little slice.
$Billions. That at least you know, right Mom?
Maybe you even have friends who make big, big money 'cause pot be illegal, Mom?"
(GASP!!!)
Well, maybe she does, maybe she doesn't. I really don't know for sure. But, man, that interview sure waked like a duck trying to keep the pond water fresh. You know?
The regular press focuses in on how funny it is that famous people smoke pot. And that's cool, I guess, it is kinda funny. Sadly, what the regular press seems to have forgotten about Pot is that in all such matters, follow the money.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Regular press, when did you lose your nerve on Pot and stop following the money? Oh... right... biker gangs and politically connected persons and... ah, ok. You are afraid, 'natch. Cool.
Now, to be fair (and real) not all the current pot supply can be traced back to gangs. Some folks are gentle-person farmers growing their Ganga in peaceful pursuits. They don't pay taxes, though... which is not really fair. That aside, they are nice people with good lives and connections in churches, community groups, non-profits, government.....
Government. The folks who build the Marxian sub-structure upon which the pot black market dynamic rests.
Are there connections between pot growers and government? Um, yes, it is necessarily the case. If you don't know this, then again I have to ask if there is a slight feeling of over-fullness and discomfort in the back of your pants... and if it is dark and quiet in your world...
Prohibition is driven by money, plain and simple. Was that way with liquor in the States, is that way with Pot in Canada. Money, money, money, money, and money. Tax money, hidden money, tomorrow's money, bribe money, hush money, extortion for money, love of money. This is a business, and this business is all about money.
Prohibitionists used the services of a recently successful suffragette movement to ban alcohol under the 'we care' banner. It worked. Worked with pot, too (same thing, different nice ladies, people like certain Mom's from Brandon... right Mom?)
Underneath these banners is MONEY. Every time, all the time.
Well, money and power. Sure, power too.
(Hmmm... who has power over the market for Pot in Canada... hmmm...)
That's the kind of thing I wish Justin had said.
Recently an NDP blogger and I chatted, and he said he was not a direct stakeholder in this whole affair. (Meaning, he didn't smoke pot.)
If he thinks the above does not form a direct link to his life and the lives of those he loves, then I wonder...
Ciao
Thursday, 24 October 2013
Yawn. OK, enough napping for Marty.
I thought I'd have juicy details from the Marty Gold Vs. case by now.
I thought, surely someone will do something this year worth writing about.
So far, not so much. At least not that I know (which is not a definitive standard, of course.)
So, I'll wake up the blog, put Marty's case on 'stand by...' mode, and get back to writing.
With Cherenkov gone (*sniff...) I have to pull extra blog duty.
Ciao.
I thought, surely someone will do something this year worth writing about.
So far, not so much. At least not that I know (which is not a definitive standard, of course.)
So, I'll wake up the blog, put Marty's case on 'stand by...' mode, and get back to writing.
With Cherenkov gone (*sniff...) I have to pull extra blog duty.
Ciao.
Wednesday, 2 January 2013
‘Working Together’ on Marty Gold
We
are well trained in the art of working as a team.
Pluralistic nations require
teamwork to build. We have team-building education through necessity in Canada.
We can and should work together to do great things.
However.
We
should not work together to do bad things.
The
law is chalk-full of strictures against bad-guy teams. Go ask any child about
super-hero teams and super-villain teams. Go see the Lord of the Rings (or read
it, your choice.) We all know this: you should not work together to do bad
things.
So... was 'alledgedly' working together at getting
Marty Gold fired from his job at The Great Canadian Talk Show on Kick-FM a
‘good’ thing to do?
I
read Anybody Want a Peanut’s first report on the ‘Marty Gold vs. The World’ law
suit filed in Manitoba’s Court of Queen’s bench. My stomach turned. My blood
boiled. My hair fell out (ok, ok…)
One
guy against some very powerful adversaries. A lone citizen against a very
powerful team. Like Spidey alone against the Legion of Villains.
One
guy, all alone.
And
so I asked myself… what would most Manitoban’s do if faced by a super-star laden
team such as does appear as the Defendants to Marty’s claim?
“Ummm…
run”, I replied to myself.
Run,
hide, change your name, get a new face, don’t tell anyone, just hope it passes one
day soon so you might get some of your life back.
Do
not fight, do not tell anyone, do not DARE push back against the 'powers play'. Anyone who cares for you will give this advise; run fast, run far, and run forever
(if necessary.) The typical Manitoban way of facing such adversity is
the posterior salute. Show them your backside as it fades into the distance.
The
reason for this good advice is simple: almost everyone knows about the team
handbook which elite regimes follow (apparently religiously) to deal with
whistleblowers and the like. The Handbook can be found all over the Internet,
for pity’s sake. If you haven’t read up on it, here’s the spoiler: the little
guy does not fare well for the contest. It is normally a most brutal
affair. The end.
As
Cherenkov points out, the next play from the power-team is likely the
hold-and-stall. Tie’em up on the boards, grind them, poke them, exhaust them,
deplete them. The Broadway-street bullies have a nearly inexhaustible supply of
legal cash to dump on some poor sap that dares dream of justice. They can crush
that dream under your money (our tax-supported 'Justice' departments. That's right, they call themselves Justice. I know.)
It
is no surprise that Cherenkov can predict the next play, as he is smarter than
Hawking. It should be a surprise that virtually everyone else in Manitoba could
make the same prediction. Ingrained in the collective psyche, this business.
Why,
the bloody hell, would Marty Gold stand up to a group like this, then? Who does
he think he has in his corner, I (again) asked myself.
And
I (again) answered, ‘well, who did he support through his work?’
Ummm... Oh.
OOOoooohhhh!!!
That
might be us.
See,
Marty was hard to get a handle on (still is). I can’t sense who he works for,
not in the same way as I can sense who… certain other people work for. Marty
seems to go after anyone and anything that goes against the public interest. He
has his own style that I quite enjoy, and other’s might not.
Regarding his style, whoopee, Google Kant’s
Antinomy of Taste. The only important thing to me is that he talks hard truth a _lot_ more than other news sources seem to. He spurs other voices to join 'the quest' for fact and perspective beyond the elite press release.
Marty
further seems without his own petard, foisting hither - tither instead from
scandal to rapscallion to regime; wherever the story was, he a-foisted. He was,
it seemed, our floating set of eyes and ears, ‘our’ being normal citizens interested
in justice within the Public domain.
He
was ours. The show was getting very popular, and then… it was gone. Our eyes
and ears were gone.
Yet
again, I asked myself, ‘what do we do about this?’ (The benefit of having an
alter-ego, you can question yourself extensively.)
‘Well’,
I said, ‘we can join the team. We can join Marty’s team.
If he is going to
stand up taking shots, we can bear witness. If he is getting hammered, we can
cheer him on. If he get’s knocked down, we can pick him up, dust him off a little.
We
could also act for the public’s interest. Tax dollars pay the other team’s
mega-salaries. We literally pay the bill for the outrages visited upon folks
like Marty, but that is the obvious point. The outrage in the gut comes from our
sponsoring unlawful regimes who were supposed to be the good guys. _Our_ good
guys.
They
were supposed to be our team. Actually, they still are supposed to be our team.
We should do something about that.'
Thanks,
self, I said.
So we
need a roster revamp.
Time to step up to our duties as co-GM’s and control the
team, change the culture.
That would support Marty's cause. It actually would.
Ciao.
Thursday, 25 October 2012
Manitoba United: Reasons Why Not To Untie
(I'll bet you thought I was going to riff on the old 'bad spellers of the world... untie!' joke.
Well, I am not.)
Let's talk about good reasons to stay in your Manitoba Provincial party, or your lack thereof, even if you are unsatisfied. We should not 'untie' ourselves from our present circumstance, because...
1. It is Too Bloody Hard
Go on, my friend. Let it out.
You don't want to have to work that hard, do you?
Guess what. Me neither.
A crisis in politics begets a problem solver, or stays a problem. The Devil you know doesn't want your ass off the couch, or the Jet's seat, or your kid's game bleacher. The Devil you know supports your free time, your... idle hands.
Heck, he even sponsors some of it directly, handing out masses of all kinds of opiates. You pay, mind, but he does the facilitating.
This Devil we know is still kinda fun. The other guy certainly won't be as much fun.
The other guy would make us work at solving problems.
Blech, right??
2. ... But Those Guys are my Friends!
Does a friend tell you what you need to hear, or what you want to hear?
Hmmm... good question.
Our great Federal Friends would get totally bummed if we travelled slightly different paths. 'Dude,' they would say, 'what's next, a name change.... like my ex- spouse did... would you hurt me like that, dude?'
Need to hear, or want to hear. Which truth will you tell?
(I mean, dude... Tradition, eh wot?)
3. We Cannot Do Anything Good Anyway
That's right. And we know it.
We are impotent, ineffective, inconsequential, insignificant, insecure, insufficient, insufferable, insular, intractable, inscrutable, in-what-ever-makes-us-sound-worthy.
(And then there's the un's...)
No point in trying.
Thank G-d.
Please, for the sake of my kid's tournaments, my quiet time with my wife, my Netflix addiction, the long walks with my doggy, please, please....
Please do not unite into one strong force of opposition against the current NDP regime.
Don't untie, either.
Thanks a bunch.
Well, I am not.)
Let's talk about good reasons to stay in your Manitoba Provincial party, or your lack thereof, even if you are unsatisfied. We should not 'untie' ourselves from our present circumstance, because...
1. It is Too Bloody Hard
Go on, my friend. Let it out.
You don't want to have to work that hard, do you?
Guess what. Me neither.
A crisis in politics begets a problem solver, or stays a problem. The Devil you know doesn't want your ass off the couch, or the Jet's seat, or your kid's game bleacher. The Devil you know supports your free time, your... idle hands.
Heck, he even sponsors some of it directly, handing out masses of all kinds of opiates. You pay, mind, but he does the facilitating.
This Devil we know is still kinda fun. The other guy certainly won't be as much fun.
The other guy would make us work at solving problems.
Blech, right??
2. ... But Those Guys are my Friends!
Does a friend tell you what you need to hear, or what you want to hear?
Hmmm... good question.
Our great Federal Friends would get totally bummed if we travelled slightly different paths. 'Dude,' they would say, 'what's next, a name change.... like my ex- spouse did... would you hurt me like that, dude?'
Need to hear, or want to hear. Which truth will you tell?
(I mean, dude... Tradition, eh wot?)
3. We Cannot Do Anything Good Anyway
That's right. And we know it.
We are impotent, ineffective, inconsequential, insignificant, insecure, insufficient, insufferable, insular, intractable, inscrutable, in-what-ever-makes-us-sound-worthy.
(And then there's the un's...)
No point in trying.
Thank G-d.
Please, for the sake of my kid's tournaments, my quiet time with my wife, my Netflix addiction, the long walks with my doggy, please, please....
Please do not unite into one strong force of opposition against the current NDP regime.
Don't untie, either.
Thanks a bunch.
Wednesday, 15 August 2012
The NRC Goes To War: Part 2, There Are No Frickin' Free iPhones, OK?
Recap: In Part 1 we reviewed publicly available documents showing Canada's $200 Billion Defence budget supporting the new Harper Government model of R & D in Canada through the enhanced IRB (Industrial and Regional Benefits) program.
Foreign Defence Contractors must spend the equivalent of the contract amount on R & D in Canada. If they partner with the NRC (National Research Council), that requirement drops to 20% of the invoice amount. These R&D 'awards' are not publicly tendered, are largely unmonitored (by normal standards) and do not follow regional guidelines. Nice.
In Part 2 (today), we describe the flow of money, and offer a teeny bit of advise to the ELA (Experimental Lakes) program.
But hey, let's get this out of the way first: Yes, this is real, ok?
Forwarded to me by someone inside an NRC building in Winnipeg. Read it, then we can move forward.
Imagine: You are sitting angry at your little scientist desk at the NRC in Winnipeg. Scared, unsure of your future, saddened by your soon-to-be-ex-co-workers laments, sickened by the apparent Conservative attack on science. You hurt, bad, desperation's hot breath warms your little scientist shoulder.
Suddenly, a ray of hope appears in your inbox....
"Sent: March-27-12 4:56 PM
(Note to Self: Re-jig past funding doc's for Military applications.
Right?)
Your Harper Government would never leave you in the cold uncertainty of 'old model' Canadian research. They ensconce you now in the fertile commercial grounds of military innovations. You can commercialize the hell out of your results (for civilian applications, 'natch...) You are now a military entrepreneur, supported by the Government of Canada. Might even get a cool new title with a decoder ring and CSIS clearance, and make James Bond-like gadgets and.. God bless you, Prime Minister.
God Bless you.
The Harper Government just minted a free iPhone program, and the little NRC scientists are the ultimate intended beneficiaries. Well, them and the Politicians, Bureaucrats and Businessmen the NRC Admiral mentions in his interview (see Part 1 Video link.)
We'll get to their part in this later, after a little chat about free iPhones.
Scene: Elected official walking down 'lobbyist row', minding their own business...
(Psst, hey buddy. Yeah, you with the Beaver hat.
Lookin' to buy a new Caddy? I'm your guy, look no further. Name's Sam.
Price? Hey, its a Caddy, who looks at the price, right?
Besides, act now and I'll throw in a free iPhone. That's right, for free!
Oh, you don't need a Caddy, hmm? Well, ok... but how about some Fighter Jets?
Yes, of course you still get the free iPhone!)
Even a funny little anonymous citizen journalist like me knows some of the professional axioms of the journalism trade. "My sources are confidential', 'Follow the Money'...
... 'There is no so thing as a Free Lunch.'
Or free iPhones, right? That new truck promotion you were trying to sell to your spouse, with the 'but honey, we get a free iPhone!' timed just right as the clincher (honey, I know you love iPhones, right?) until honey says 'ummm... who do you think is really paying for that iPhone?'
You stare back at your better half, slack jawed, suddenly noticing the naiveté oozing from your pores, green gills shining like a neon 'Screw Me, I'm a Rube' t-shirt. You are a mark. You just told your significant other that, absolutely for sure, they married a sucker. Great, huh?
There are no free iPhones, folks. Only marks who think there are free iPhones. Marks have money just as green as non-marks, maybe even greener, so the marketing world keeps handing out free iPhones.
With your purchase of a raft of Fighter Jets, that is.
R & D spending is the 'free iPhone' Canadians get when they make a military purchase. And holy hell, what a deal, right? Dollar for dollar matching! Aren't we clever, eh?
But... but what about the Cell Phone Contract, you ask. Who is the carrier providing service to your shiny new iDevice? How much does this thing really cost at the end of the term? I mean, iPhones without data and voice service are called bricks, right? They don't work unless you pour money into the network connection, right? And Canadians pour more money into 'Network Connections' than anyone else in the world, right...?
Right, my little friend. Oh, so right you are.
Ok, enough stalling, lo let's follow the money.
I present 'Hypothetical Scenario 1', below. See if it rings plausible to you.
Scenario 1 - Pad, Multiply, Enhance, Partner Up, 'Buy' it back.
Step 1: All Military Contractors pad quotes at least 15% for IRB considerations (there's your free iPhone.) People of Canada fund the IRB requirements for US Military Contractor (Sam is his name for now) who wins contract. Lets say Pad = $100.00 Canadian, for easy counting.
Step 2: Sam creates new 'Canadian' company (NEWCO) to fund and manage the R & D project. NEWCO qualifies for SRED Tax Credits, garners rebate of 50% on expenditures (Multiply). $100.00 is now $150.00 Canadian.
Step 3: NRC (IRAP, Research Funding, etc.) contributes major dollars to project (Enhance). Largely under-supervised funding on some undisclosed 'matching' basis up to, let's imagine, 75% of total project costs. $150.00 is now $600.00 Canadian.
Step 4: Find some Canadian Rich Guys (CRG's) to invest (Partner Up), go into production for your 'innovation'. $600.00 is Sam's investment (see above), so let's say CRG's in for $100.00 more, new total $700.00 Canadian.
Step 5: Use future IRB requirements to purchase 'innovation' products from Newco at very, very healthy margins (Buy Back). Reward CRG's.
Step 6: Provide products to Canadian Government under new contract (Whoo-Hoo!!)
Step 7: Figure out what the hell to do with all the profit you just made. Seriously.
My friends, it doesn't take that much imagination to come up with several other scenarios, all quite lucrative, all bought and paid for with Canadian dollars.
These are not tendered, barely supervised, without regard for regional equality, and very much based on friendships and who-you-know. The potential for abuse is monumental.
Abuse, you say? What... what do you mean abuse?
Canadians think they are getting free iPhones. They are not, it seems, under such potential terms as I describe. We think this will benefit the country. Dubious benefits, indeed. We think that Sam is paying the bill, when it appears all the dollars are Canadian. We think that nice Canadian research is going on in the NRC labs, not James Bond stuff (or worse?)
But abuse, you still say? How is it abuse to be screwed when you walk around wearing a 'Screw Me, I'm a Rube' T-shirt...?'
Good point.
COMING IN PART 3: Some 'who's' to attach to those 'what's'.
BONUS SEGMENT: To my friends at the ELA.
Greetings,
You can sit sadly by your desks and wait for the moth ball delivery truck.
Or...
You can figure out how your current situation relates to the military IRB money.
Just sayin'.
Ciao.
Foreign Defence Contractors must spend the equivalent of the contract amount on R & D in Canada. If they partner with the NRC (National Research Council), that requirement drops to 20% of the invoice amount. These R&D 'awards' are not publicly tendered, are largely unmonitored (by normal standards) and do not follow regional guidelines. Nice.
In Part 2 (today), we describe the flow of money, and offer a teeny bit of advise to the ELA (Experimental Lakes) program.
But hey, let's get this out of the way first: Yes, this is real, ok?
Forwarded to me by someone inside an NRC building in Winnipeg. Read it, then we can move forward.
Imagine: You are sitting angry at your little scientist desk at the NRC in Winnipeg. Scared, unsure of your future, saddened by your soon-to-be-ex-co-workers laments, sickened by the apparent Conservative attack on science. You hurt, bad, desperation's hot breath warms your little scientist shoulder.
Suddenly, a ray of hope appears in your inbox....
"Sent: March-27-12 4:56 PM
To: IBD All Tenants; CCBT All Tenants
Subject: Seminar - Friday, March 30, 3:30 p.m.`
Subject: Seminar - Friday, March 30, 3:30 p.m.`
As the National Research Council transitions into our new structure as a research technology organization (RTO), we've been hosting a series of RTO-themed workshops and seminars. You may be interested in attending our Friday afternoon seminar, Canada’s Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRB) Policy: Exploring Research & Development Partnerships Opportunities.
We're fortunate to welcome Brent DePape, Senior Policy Analyst, Policy, Planning & External Relations with Western Economic Diversification Canada, who will be speaking on March 30,3:30 p.m. in the Herzberg Room. Here's a description of his presentation:
Canada’s IRB Policy was first implemented in 1986 to ensure that Canadian companies maximized opportunities arising from Canadian government procurements. In essence the policy requires that winning bidders of major crown projects (i.e. greater than $100Million) procure goods and services in Canada equivalent to that amount. Recent changes to the IRB Policy are designed to incentivize business activities that align with government priorities, including increased research and development activity. An understanding of the Policy and the recently implemented changes can better position not-for-profit research institutions in refining related strategies and developing potential partnership opportunities with prime contractors.
We look forward to seeing you there."
Right?)
Your Harper Government would never leave you in the cold uncertainty of 'old model' Canadian research. They ensconce you now in the fertile commercial grounds of military innovations. You can commercialize the hell out of your results (for civilian applications, 'natch...) You are now a military entrepreneur, supported by the Government of Canada. Might even get a cool new title with a decoder ring and CSIS clearance, and make James Bond-like gadgets and.. God bless you, Prime Minister.
God Bless you.
The Harper Government just minted a free iPhone program, and the little NRC scientists are the ultimate intended beneficiaries. Well, them and the Politicians, Bureaucrats and Businessmen the NRC Admiral mentions in his interview (see Part 1 Video link.)
We'll get to their part in this later, after a little chat about free iPhones.
Scene: Elected official walking down 'lobbyist row', minding their own business...
(Psst, hey buddy. Yeah, you with the Beaver hat.
Lookin' to buy a new Caddy? I'm your guy, look no further. Name's Sam.
Price? Hey, its a Caddy, who looks at the price, right?
Besides, act now and I'll throw in a free iPhone. That's right, for free!
Oh, you don't need a Caddy, hmm? Well, ok... but how about some Fighter Jets?
Yes, of course you still get the free iPhone!)
Even a funny little anonymous citizen journalist like me knows some of the professional axioms of the journalism trade. "My sources are confidential', 'Follow the Money'...
... 'There is no so thing as a Free Lunch.'
Or free iPhones, right? That new truck promotion you were trying to sell to your spouse, with the 'but honey, we get a free iPhone!' timed just right as the clincher (honey, I know you love iPhones, right?) until honey says 'ummm... who do you think is really paying for that iPhone?'
You stare back at your better half, slack jawed, suddenly noticing the naiveté oozing from your pores, green gills shining like a neon 'Screw Me, I'm a Rube' t-shirt. You are a mark. You just told your significant other that, absolutely for sure, they married a sucker. Great, huh?
There are no free iPhones, folks. Only marks who think there are free iPhones. Marks have money just as green as non-marks, maybe even greener, so the marketing world keeps handing out free iPhones.
With your purchase of a raft of Fighter Jets, that is.
R & D spending is the 'free iPhone' Canadians get when they make a military purchase. And holy hell, what a deal, right? Dollar for dollar matching! Aren't we clever, eh?
But... but what about the Cell Phone Contract, you ask. Who is the carrier providing service to your shiny new iDevice? How much does this thing really cost at the end of the term? I mean, iPhones without data and voice service are called bricks, right? They don't work unless you pour money into the network connection, right? And Canadians pour more money into 'Network Connections' than anyone else in the world, right...?
Right, my little friend. Oh, so right you are.
Ok, enough stalling, lo let's follow the money.
I present 'Hypothetical Scenario 1', below. See if it rings plausible to you.
Scenario 1 - Pad, Multiply, Enhance, Partner Up, 'Buy' it back.
Step 1: All Military Contractors pad quotes at least 15% for IRB considerations (there's your free iPhone.) People of Canada fund the IRB requirements for US Military Contractor (Sam is his name for now) who wins contract. Lets say Pad = $100.00 Canadian, for easy counting.
Step 2: Sam creates new 'Canadian' company (NEWCO) to fund and manage the R & D project. NEWCO qualifies for SRED Tax Credits, garners rebate of 50% on expenditures (Multiply). $100.00 is now $150.00 Canadian.
Step 3: NRC (IRAP, Research Funding, etc.) contributes major dollars to project (Enhance). Largely under-supervised funding on some undisclosed 'matching' basis up to, let's imagine, 75% of total project costs. $150.00 is now $600.00 Canadian.
Step 4: Find some Canadian Rich Guys (CRG's) to invest (Partner Up), go into production for your 'innovation'. $600.00 is Sam's investment (see above), so let's say CRG's in for $100.00 more, new total $700.00 Canadian.
Step 5: Use future IRB requirements to purchase 'innovation' products from Newco at very, very healthy margins (Buy Back). Reward CRG's.
Step 6: Provide products to Canadian Government under new contract (Whoo-Hoo!!)
Step 7: Figure out what the hell to do with all the profit you just made. Seriously.
My friends, it doesn't take that much imagination to come up with several other scenarios, all quite lucrative, all bought and paid for with Canadian dollars.
These are not tendered, barely supervised, without regard for regional equality, and very much based on friendships and who-you-know. The potential for abuse is monumental.
Abuse, you say? What... what do you mean abuse?
Canadians think they are getting free iPhones. They are not, it seems, under such potential terms as I describe. We think this will benefit the country. Dubious benefits, indeed. We think that Sam is paying the bill, when it appears all the dollars are Canadian. We think that nice Canadian research is going on in the NRC labs, not James Bond stuff (or worse?)
But abuse, you still say? How is it abuse to be screwed when you walk around wearing a 'Screw Me, I'm a Rube' T-shirt...?'
Good point.
COMING IN PART 3: Some 'who's' to attach to those 'what's'.
BONUS SEGMENT: To my friends at the ELA.
Greetings,
You can sit sadly by your desks and wait for the moth ball delivery truck.
Or...
You can figure out how your current situation relates to the military IRB money.
Just sayin'.
Ciao.
Wednesday, 25 July 2012
The NRC Goes to War: Part 1, the Gathering Storm
The Gathering Storm
The National Research Council of Canada (NRC) is going to
war… or at least they are trending that way.
Massive job losses at the NRC have prompted journalists
across the country to point to a ‘brain drain’ in Canada. “Here go the science-less Conservatives
wiping out the intelligencia (sp?), stomping objective reason into the floor mat of
the economic engine.”
Scary stuff, yes? No-one smart left to keep the right-wing
objectively in check. Brr… don’t you get a major shiver?
Hey, don’t believe the pinko propaganda, folks. Relax. Let
me ease your mind and take away that Orange chill.
The Harper Government has told us again, and again, and
again that spending in the sector will not decline, dammit. If anything, they
say, spending will increase over previous levels.
I believe them. You should, too.
In case you don’t, I am going to spell a few things out to
you in the little series I like to call:
“The NRC Goes to War”
Jan. 4, 2011, Youtube –
NRC mastermind John McDougall gives
Canada a peek at the next five-to-ten year plan. In his very Liberal red
chair (just saying…) Admiral McDougall (he isn’t really, come on…) describes
the next wave in the NRC’s battle plan.
No outright talk of war, but listen closely to the alignment
of business, public service agencies, the government. ‘Coherent integrated
advice’ from a new cuddly hug-fest where ‘it’ is knitted together holistically.
“Strategic issues that need to be addressed…” all cuddly Politically Correct
objectives, not a warplane in sight. Enabling, green technologies for everyone! Thanks, John!
NRC 2011, a big new shiny machine filled with friendly politicians,
bureaucrats, and business people driving Battleship NRC into the 21st
century (or at least the next 5 – 10 years.) A great gathering (humans, elves, and dwarves anyone?) which will face the coming intellectual storm.
Working together on their common objective, which is…
Working together on their common objective, which is…
(Wait for it, faithful listeners.)
In a myriad of posts, screen shots, and P/R blah-blahs
the NRC and the Ministers behind it have unleashed of late, you hear one theme
trumpeted again and again:
The NRC is open for business.
The NRC is now your one stop shop for all thing R & D in Canada. They don’t sponsor their own research anymore. Now they sponsor yours (if you sell us stuff for war.... whoops, spoiler alert!!)
The NRC is now your one stop shop for all thing R & D in Canada. They don’t sponsor their own research anymore. Now they sponsor yours (if you sell us stuff for war.... whoops, spoiler alert!!)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/03/06/technology-goodyear-national-research-council.html
The Harper Government assures you that the funding has
not decreased. At all. Dammit. So don't worry about not enough money in the pot to see this through. There is, they assure you....
We’ll get to the funding in a little bit (next articles,
kiddies) but for now, let me lay upon you the real catalyst for change in the NRC
that Mr. McDougall may have been too shy to spill back in 2011.
Here it is for you now, the new NRC Canadian catalyst for
change:
"Leveraging Defence and Security Procurement
Defence and security-related procurement constitutes an
important opportunity for the support of business innovation because it is such
a large proportion of total procurement and because state-of-the-art
technological sophistication is required in modern equipment. Indeed, one of
the key drivers of the US innovation system has been the civilian adaptation of
military technology.
In 2008, the federal government announced the Canada-First
Defence Strategy designed to strengthen key military capabilities and to
facilitate Canadian industry participation, particularly high-value-added
technology sectors, in forthcoming defence procurement requirements. There are
three main industrial components of the strategy: the development of critical
(short term) and strategic (longer term) technologies, industrial and regional
benefits, and sector-specific procurement."
Bam! Johnny grab yer' gun, right?
But… but what has this military spending gibberish got to do with Battleship NRC, you
ask?
Ah. You are so sweet and innocent. I love ya' for it, and hate to do this to you, but...
Check this out (below).
We’ll talk later, once you digest this chunk. Then I’ll feed you some
more, ‘natch.
(Pay careful attention to the money, folks. Follow the flow of money.)
Industry Canada Backgrounder — Canada's Industrial and
Regional Benefits Policy
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ic1.nsf/eng/06723.html
Key Snippets:
“Canada's IRB Policy requires prime contractors to undertake
business activities in Canada that total 100 percent of the value of
the defence or security contract they have just won with the Government of
Canada.”
“The IRB Policy works within this procurement framework and
ensures that economic benefits flow to Canada as a result of defence
procurement by requiring prime contractors to place work in Canada over the
life of the contract.”
“The IRB Policy strongly encourages prime contractors to use
their best business sense to select their Canadian partners and suppliers, with
the goal of generating long-term, sustainable business relationships in Canada.
These strategic relationships stimulate the Canadian economy while helping to
ensure a more competitive Canadian industry.”
“… promote the creation of consortia between major defence
contractors, Canadian industry and publicly funded research institutions…”
"New Approach — Incentive for the Creation of
Public-Private Consortia
Current Practice
There are no extra incentives (other than one-to-one credit)
offered to prime contractors to invest in consortia, unless the money flows to
post secondary education institutions or public research institutions (for
example, National Research Council, Defence Research and Development Canada,
etc.), in which instances a 5X multiplier is applied for cash
contributions.
New Approach — Enhanced Priority Technology List
Current Approach
Prime contractors are currently not required to invest a
minimum percentage of their Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRB) obligations
into medium and/or long term emerging critical technology needs of the
Department of National Defence (DND).
Why change?
Industry Canada (IC) desires to better align the IRB Policy
with the emerging critical technology needs of DND. The addition of a more
focused technology list will provide important information to industry
regarding the future needs of the military, thereby encouraging the development
of Canadian advanced technologies in the aerospace and defence sector. The new
list also demonstrates a more coordinated approach to defence industrial
development across government departments and reflects a willingness to work
together to seek technology-focused outcomes. Lastly, the change may enhance export
opportunities for Canadian advanced technology firms, as the requirements for
allied defence procurements become harmonized along specific defence platforms.
Firm-Level R&D and Commercialization (upcoming)
"Encourage
primes, to invest in long term, innovation-focused activities in Canadian SMEs.
It will establish long term, strategic relationships with primes, leading to
increased R&D activities, market-driven technology development and more
robust..."
Q and A
A4 "No, the future sales of products developed
through a Consortium transaction are not eligible for IRB Credit in the same
transaction. The only eligible IRB credit that can be generated from a
Consortium is from the contributions to the consortium from the consortium
partners.
However, should the Contractor procure goods and services
from the Consortium, the purchase will be considered as a separate IRB
transaction. The transaction will be treated in the same manner as procurements
the Contractor makes in Canada that are unrelated to the consortium. No
multiplier will be applied.'
Q6 "Can in-kind donations apply towards a Prime
Contractor's IRB obligations?
A6 "Yes.
In-kind donations towards Consortia can
be credited towards a Prime Contractor's IRB obligation. In-kind contributions
may be credited based on third party valuations of the cost of the donation to
the Consortium. However, in-kind donations are not eligible for multipliers."
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/042.nsf/eng/00015.html#faq3
'Is there a required regional distribution of IRB work across
Canada? Does the Policy force IRB contractor to work with specific companies?
No, the IRB Policy is a market-driven policy, which means
that IRB contractors place work with Canadian companies that make the best
business sense to them. The Policy is set up this way so it will ensure that
long-lasting business relationships are created and maintained between IRB
contractors and Canadian companies. The Policy does not dictate where IRB work
must be placed. However, we encourage bidders/IRB contractors to make efforts
to have a balanced regional IRB'
http://rd-review.ca/eic/site/033.nsf/eng/00320.html
"It bears noting that the rules in international trade
agreements exempt R&D contracts and "first product or service"
and "prototype development" from open bidding. This means that there
is considerable scope to ensure that contract R&D is undertaken by
Canadian-based suppliers."
And just FYI...
Ministers Involved (Federal Canada)
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ic1.nsf/eng/h_00279.html
Thursday, 12 July 2012
Man U: A Love Story Part II
(Miss me...? Just a little...?
I've been working on a story. Almost all-consuming. Apologies, back to work.)
Manitoba United: A Love Story Part II
Time flies fast upon the wing of political pause. Election fatigue gives way to heady days of summer, our return to family and friends (sans party) whisks the wee hours into the sweet memory filing cabinet. 'Oh, so much better than knocking on doors is this knocking back brewskies.'
Turn up the fire pit and the music, find your lover, enjoy being Canadian. Time flies by in honest fleeting moments born of the political pause.
Around said campfire, the background hum of the body politic lost to the romantic crackle of life, lovers unite among the various dances souls shall step when the spot lights are turned off. Honest living in private (mainly), folks getting about their business for business' sake, lovers loving love.
Love.
Oh, my Love.
Let's talk about love. And Manitoba United ('natch!)
Recently I talked about the Queen, and the love of Her Majesty spurring on certain parties towards a United political movement through which to more effectively oppose the NDP regime... err... government. Maybe even replace them (see piece on election results last year, 'k?)
Obviously, her Majesty is a living embodiment of an Ideal, and it is the ideal we love. The idea is that a super-person is all concerned with our well-being as her highest priority, and that she needs our help to do her job. She needs us to step up and lend a hand. We self-actualize through her siren's call of social responsibility. Very cool.
In a Hegelian flip-flop, the little people take power this way (a la Marty Gold's 'you have the power'). Great power, which begets great responsibility. Part of that responsibility lies in examination of one's own life, and the conditions for living in which one finds themselves. Being so self-informed, we make decisions about good and right actions.
(Hold tight, the point is coming...)
Let's talk about 'pragmatic allocation' compared to 'utter commitment'. Still talking about love here, and how we love, and how love motivates us.
Do you know some persons who go 'all in' when they love?
How about persons who weigh each drop of love allocation so very, very carefully?
There ain't no right or wrong way to do it. Different beats, different drummers. It is all good loving, yes?
But the results of the two 'systems' of loving end in polar extremes.
Like they do in Politics....
A. Zealot, idealist, party insider, bought-and-sold, dyed-in-wool, fervent supporter.
B. Pragmatist, Flip-flopper, swing vote, chameleon, opportunist.
Assignment: Which of the above (A or B) describes the 'all-in' political lover, and which the 'carefully allocating' kind?
The new girl in town is the old flame who left and came back with a make-over. She, for those not invited to participate in the current regime, is the flame we should have loved but for our fickle turn. She who is of us, is for us, who needs us. The Girl Next Door (if you live next to a castle....)
She who unites lovers of all kinds.
Nearly one year past the election, all (non-regime types) who love this Province are called to examine the nature of their political love, and their own allocations and commitments. Is it the 'party' you love, or is it the people and the Queen who serves them? Are you so utterly lost in love of a particular party, have you so shrewdly allocated your love to one 'group', that you can't even see the need to change?
Are you literally 'blinded by love' to the need to Unite?
Its ok if you are. Love is so powerful an influence on our decisions and actions. I get it.
But...
Vote splitting in this silly first-past-the-post plurality of parties system is harming you, your children, friends, lovers, neighbours, employees and bosses, grandmother, barber....
It is harming everyone you love. Actually love. Like, love love.
What have you been getting back from your current party that it is worth the suffering price paid by those you love?
Manitoba United should appeal to 'all-in' lovers and 'careful allocation' lovers alike. It should be reasonable and thrilling. It should be the biggest tent of all, a keystone evolution of the ideal 'political tent'.
(Like Bracken's pragmatists, but updated for the new millennium.)
Sitting with our loved ones around said fire, we could be engineering this new mighty tent. Every person carving a personal pole, designing to form a tent one million poles strong.
Then, we could all get together underneath this newly erected tent and...
Hold a major love-in, bigger even than Folk Fest.
Ah.... big, big love.
Or... we could continue living stories about Jet's tickets, collusion between Ministers and Media and Public Servants, under performing tax dollars, lack of transparency, abuse of power and privilege, pandering to Unions at the expense of the People.... you know, the normal stuff you get under a 'natural ruling party' of this type.
Just saying.
Love,
Rod Rouge
XXOO
I've been working on a story. Almost all-consuming. Apologies, back to work.)
Manitoba United: A Love Story Part II
Time flies fast upon the wing of political pause. Election fatigue gives way to heady days of summer, our return to family and friends (sans party) whisks the wee hours into the sweet memory filing cabinet. 'Oh, so much better than knocking on doors is this knocking back brewskies.'
Turn up the fire pit and the music, find your lover, enjoy being Canadian. Time flies by in honest fleeting moments born of the political pause.
Around said campfire, the background hum of the body politic lost to the romantic crackle of life, lovers unite among the various dances souls shall step when the spot lights are turned off. Honest living in private (mainly), folks getting about their business for business' sake, lovers loving love.
Love.
Oh, my Love.
Let's talk about love. And Manitoba United ('natch!)
Recently I talked about the Queen, and the love of Her Majesty spurring on certain parties towards a United political movement through which to more effectively oppose the NDP regime... err... government. Maybe even replace them (see piece on election results last year, 'k?)
Obviously, her Majesty is a living embodiment of an Ideal, and it is the ideal we love. The idea is that a super-person is all concerned with our well-being as her highest priority, and that she needs our help to do her job. She needs us to step up and lend a hand. We self-actualize through her siren's call of social responsibility. Very cool.
In a Hegelian flip-flop, the little people take power this way (a la Marty Gold's 'you have the power'). Great power, which begets great responsibility. Part of that responsibility lies in examination of one's own life, and the conditions for living in which one finds themselves. Being so self-informed, we make decisions about good and right actions.
(Hold tight, the point is coming...)
Let's talk about 'pragmatic allocation' compared to 'utter commitment'. Still talking about love here, and how we love, and how love motivates us.
Do you know some persons who go 'all in' when they love?
How about persons who weigh each drop of love allocation so very, very carefully?
There ain't no right or wrong way to do it. Different beats, different drummers. It is all good loving, yes?
But the results of the two 'systems' of loving end in polar extremes.
Like they do in Politics....
A. Zealot, idealist, party insider, bought-and-sold, dyed-in-wool, fervent supporter.
B. Pragmatist, Flip-flopper, swing vote, chameleon, opportunist.
Assignment: Which of the above (A or B) describes the 'all-in' political lover, and which the 'carefully allocating' kind?
The new girl in town is the old flame who left and came back with a make-over. She, for those not invited to participate in the current regime, is the flame we should have loved but for our fickle turn. She who is of us, is for us, who needs us. The Girl Next Door (if you live next to a castle....)
She who unites lovers of all kinds.
Nearly one year past the election, all (non-regime types) who love this Province are called to examine the nature of their political love, and their own allocations and commitments. Is it the 'party' you love, or is it the people and the Queen who serves them? Are you so utterly lost in love of a particular party, have you so shrewdly allocated your love to one 'group', that you can't even see the need to change?
Are you literally 'blinded by love' to the need to Unite?
Its ok if you are. Love is so powerful an influence on our decisions and actions. I get it.
But...
Vote splitting in this silly first-past-the-post plurality of parties system is harming you, your children, friends, lovers, neighbours, employees and bosses, grandmother, barber....
It is harming everyone you love. Actually love. Like, love love.
What have you been getting back from your current party that it is worth the suffering price paid by those you love?
Manitoba United should appeal to 'all-in' lovers and 'careful allocation' lovers alike. It should be reasonable and thrilling. It should be the biggest tent of all, a keystone evolution of the ideal 'political tent'.
(Like Bracken's pragmatists, but updated for the new millennium.)
Sitting with our loved ones around said fire, we could be engineering this new mighty tent. Every person carving a personal pole, designing to form a tent one million poles strong.
Then, we could all get together underneath this newly erected tent and...
Hold a major love-in, bigger even than Folk Fest.
Ah.... big, big love.
Or... we could continue living stories about Jet's tickets, collusion between Ministers and Media and Public Servants, under performing tax dollars, lack of transparency, abuse of power and privilege, pandering to Unions at the expense of the People.... you know, the normal stuff you get under a 'natural ruling party' of this type.
Just saying.
Love,
Rod Rouge
XXOO
Thursday, 1 March 2012
'Man U' Breaking News: Rod Rouge is Inconsistent (or not...)
It occurred to me that, when the shoes are a-dropping and the Who-skins a-warbling, I get a little sidetracked.
Due (mainly) to this, I seem full of baloney on past promises made, and prescriptions that seem to modify over time.
Spurs me to address three things quickly (my fragile self-image, this is partly a self-care exercise.)
Then, at the bottom, I'm going to tell you something about myself.
Will unmask me somewhat, but only in small circles.... so small, its safe to say what's on my mind yet remain anonymous ('cause its cool being anonymous!!!)
Promises Part:
1. Manitoba United, I said, needed the PC's and Liberals to Unite.
Then I said the Greens, too.
Q: Why?
A: Because it is a radical concept that I am unpacking slowly, but surely. I'm not done yet.
Hey listen, the Greens are key. How the PC's and Liberals treat them is a litmus test. How James & Co. flex to accommodate this golden opportunity will be... a defining movement.
Mark my words.
Thought I should make that clear.
2. I promised you a glimpse into the future....
Yes I did, and here it is:
Two elections from now, Manitoba United supporters may chose to leave (or not) under circumstances far more kind due to the changes in the electoral process which I (and others) espouse.
More fun with that later, throwing it out in bite-form now to stir your imagination and make part-good on the promise.
3. Promised list of factors influencing the Manitoba United Vote (up or down).
I'll use super-summary if / then's now, filling out 'poorly, late, widely embraced', etc. later:
A. The 'Down' list:
1. If done poorly, then more vote splitting and voter apathy.
2. If done late, then same as above.
3. If done small, then same...
Poorly / late / small cause downward pressure.
B. The 'Up' List:
1. If widely embraced, then army of highly motivated volunteers.
2. If honest philosophical underpinnings, then attract those who reject 'phony'.
3. If well explained, then understood and (more likely) supported.
4. If trustworthy 'platform', then can leave 'there' and join 'here'.
There are many sub-groups under these main headings, but I believe they are the main headings, as a list, so I present.
Upshot: this is a risk.
Execution is key, obviously. It is our responsibility to execute.
Our responsibility....
Right, Uncle Bob?
And so lastly...
About Me.
Sigh... ok.
I build 'lets-all-work-together' systems. I'm frickin' serious. On computers and such. That's me.
I have world-wide patent, trade secret, and mucho actual software designed to bring _very different_ people together to do 'good things' commonly.
And yes I'm serious, this isn't the funny part, k?
Some systems my team and I create seem... bizarre.
They come from Manitoba, an unlikley birth place for such things. They required a tonne of resource (sweat, blood, and tears), investments not often made, especially around these parts. They are big systems... with inner working resembling living things... and that's still kinda creepy, takes getting used to.
Bizarre stuff, Keystone originals.
Yet none-the-less real, and quite effective.
I have been asked why we do such odd work.
Necessity, I say.
A mother crying in a call to you, her heart breaking. Then a dozen mothers. Then hundreds. My heart broke a bit each time, large cracks developed.
(I'd give detail on the contents of the 'calls', but I'm staying anonymous...)
Necessity comes forward and breaks my heart, then this bizarre 'system-stuff' flows out through the cracks. It is meant to help, and often it does.
My day job. Kinda weird, eh?
Now I 'hear' a new system needed in Manitoba, my home.
I imagine a Manitoba United System born in response to cries of necessity.
I, a strange expert, say this can be done. I would like to help.
It felt important to say it out loud.
So... that's a bit about me (me-me, not Rouge me... umm... yeah.)
(I feel kinda naked now.... where's my anonymous blanky?)
Hey, lets do this, right?
Ciao
Due (mainly) to this, I seem full of baloney on past promises made, and prescriptions that seem to modify over time.
Spurs me to address three things quickly (my fragile self-image, this is partly a self-care exercise.)
Then, at the bottom, I'm going to tell you something about myself.
Will unmask me somewhat, but only in small circles.... so small, its safe to say what's on my mind yet remain anonymous ('cause its cool being anonymous!!!)
Promises Part:
1. Manitoba United, I said, needed the PC's and Liberals to Unite.
Then I said the Greens, too.
Q: Why?
A: Because it is a radical concept that I am unpacking slowly, but surely. I'm not done yet.
Hey listen, the Greens are key. How the PC's and Liberals treat them is a litmus test. How James & Co. flex to accommodate this golden opportunity will be... a defining movement.
Mark my words.
Thought I should make that clear.
2. I promised you a glimpse into the future....
Yes I did, and here it is:
Two elections from now, Manitoba United supporters may chose to leave (or not) under circumstances far more kind due to the changes in the electoral process which I (and others) espouse.
More fun with that later, throwing it out in bite-form now to stir your imagination and make part-good on the promise.
3. Promised list of factors influencing the Manitoba United Vote (up or down).
I'll use super-summary if / then's now, filling out 'poorly, late, widely embraced', etc. later:
A. The 'Down' list:
1. If done poorly, then more vote splitting and voter apathy.
2. If done late, then same as above.
3. If done small, then same...
Poorly / late / small cause downward pressure.
B. The 'Up' List:
1. If widely embraced, then army of highly motivated volunteers.
2. If honest philosophical underpinnings, then attract those who reject 'phony'.
3. If well explained, then understood and (more likely) supported.
4. If trustworthy 'platform', then can leave 'there' and join 'here'.
There are many sub-groups under these main headings, but I believe they are the main headings, as a list, so I present.
Upshot: this is a risk.
Execution is key, obviously. It is our responsibility to execute.
Our responsibility....
Right, Uncle Bob?
And so lastly...
About Me.
Sigh... ok.
I build 'lets-all-work-together' systems. I'm frickin' serious. On computers and such. That's me.
I have world-wide patent, trade secret, and mucho actual software designed to bring _very different_ people together to do 'good things' commonly.
And yes I'm serious, this isn't the funny part, k?
Some systems my team and I create seem... bizarre.
They come from Manitoba, an unlikley birth place for such things. They required a tonne of resource (sweat, blood, and tears), investments not often made, especially around these parts. They are big systems... with inner working resembling living things... and that's still kinda creepy, takes getting used to.
Bizarre stuff, Keystone originals.
Yet none-the-less real, and quite effective.
I have been asked why we do such odd work.
Necessity, I say.
A mother crying in a call to you, her heart breaking. Then a dozen mothers. Then hundreds. My heart broke a bit each time, large cracks developed.
(I'd give detail on the contents of the 'calls', but I'm staying anonymous...)
Necessity comes forward and breaks my heart, then this bizarre 'system-stuff' flows out through the cracks. It is meant to help, and often it does.
My day job. Kinda weird, eh?
Now I 'hear' a new system needed in Manitoba, my home.
I imagine a Manitoba United System born in response to cries of necessity.
I, a strange expert, say this can be done. I would like to help.
It felt important to say it out loud.
So... that's a bit about me (me-me, not Rouge me... umm... yeah.)
(I feel kinda naked now.... where's my anonymous blanky?)
Hey, lets do this, right?
Ciao
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
Manitoba United Cast: Sandra Who-skins?
Ah, the Free Press, Manitoba's great gift to clarity of purpose. We see ulterior purpose each time they put ink on newsprint about Man U, don't we?
Well, don't we?
Case in point (as if you needed it...): Sandra Who-skins (Hoskins.)
Sandra What-skins?
Heh .....
Ok, ok, sorry, sorry Sandra. To be fair, you ran in an election, and apparently you are on the Liberal board, so the Internet remembers you at least.
The Internet remembers when you said:
Three years ago, my daughter contacted Gary Doer, Theresa Oswald, Hugh McFayden and Jon Gerrard. Jon Gerrard was the only politician who responded to request for help. Jon helped us navigate the health care system to have my daughter placed on the waiting list for a double hip transplant. Six months later, my daughter had both her hips replaced one week apart. It fundamentally changed her life. From this experience, I have learned that one person can make a significant difference in the lives of others. I am running to make a difference for the voters in Dawson Trail.
Do you remember, Sandra, when the man who the Free Press says you just called a toxic obsequious toad of a carnival barker, inspired you through his right actions to take part in the political process?
Well, the Internet remembers, Sandra Who-skins. And now everyone who reads this blog does, too.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me be so very clear on the topic of why the Manitoba United party is a requirement for the next Manitoba Provincial election.
I present to you: Sandra How-skins
Because persons like Sandra are so involved in it, the current Liberal Party of Manitoba holds very, very low attraction for most right-minded persons. And we are legion.
The ideas that the party is to represent (which ones? Watch Jon for a while, it becomes obvious...), these core ideas get lost in the grade-school rhetoric of a who-gives-a-crap 'party insider' like Sandra Hoskins. Yeah, I actually know her name.
Because the Winnipeg Free Press (a misnomer if there ever was one, 'cause it ain't cheap to buy this paper...) prints Sandra little ranty, and not the real story, they win the award for most transparent ulterior motive of the year. (If we're lucky, the Black Rod (s) will hand them the prize.... go get'm big guy (s))
Sandra is an important character in the Manitoba United cast due mainly to the 'what we must reject' nature of her role. You have to walk away from her, you just have to, and that's a cool chunk of cathartic art right there. I could not have written her any better myself (and I have mad skills, and you know that.)
Oh, and by the way, Manitoba Party? Umm... did anyone hear that the name is taken? Oh you did? And you still refer to the new party as the Manitoba Party? Oh... did you ever hear of the law? I mean, like, ever?
Manitoba United Party.
It is inevitable.
Thanks to people like Sandra, the time is nigh.
Thanks Sandra. You made a difference after all.
Well, don't we?
Case in point (as if you needed it...): Sandra Who-skins (Hoskins.)
Sandra What-skins?
Heh .....
Ok, ok, sorry, sorry Sandra. To be fair, you ran in an election, and apparently you are on the Liberal board, so the Internet remembers you at least.
The Internet remembers when you said:
"Why are you running?
Do you remember, Sandra, when the man who the Free Press says you just called a toxic obsequious toad of a carnival barker, inspired you through his right actions to take part in the political process?
Well, the Internet remembers, Sandra Who-skins. And now everyone who reads this blog does, too.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me be so very clear on the topic of why the Manitoba United party is a requirement for the next Manitoba Provincial election.
I present to you: Sandra How-skins
Because persons like Sandra are so involved in it, the current Liberal Party of Manitoba holds very, very low attraction for most right-minded persons. And we are legion.
The ideas that the party is to represent (which ones? Watch Jon for a while, it becomes obvious...), these core ideas get lost in the grade-school rhetoric of a who-gives-a-crap 'party insider' like Sandra Hoskins. Yeah, I actually know her name.
Because the Winnipeg Free Press (a misnomer if there ever was one, 'cause it ain't cheap to buy this paper...) prints Sandra little ranty, and not the real story, they win the award for most transparent ulterior motive of the year. (If we're lucky, the Black Rod (s) will hand them the prize.... go get'm big guy (s))
Sandra is an important character in the Manitoba United cast due mainly to the 'what we must reject' nature of her role. You have to walk away from her, you just have to, and that's a cool chunk of cathartic art right there. I could not have written her any better myself (and I have mad skills, and you know that.)
Oh, and by the way, Manitoba Party? Umm... did anyone hear that the name is taken? Oh you did? And you still refer to the new party as the Manitoba Party? Oh... did you ever hear of the law? I mean, like, ever?
Manitoba United Party.
It is inevitable.
Thanks to people like Sandra, the time is nigh.
Thanks Sandra. You made a difference after all.
Tuesday, 28 February 2012
'Manitoba United' Breaking News: 2 Down, 1 to Go...
(I am too slow to affect history, clearly. Cant even get it all out there in Blog-print before it starts happening....)
Writing away on the next installment of of the 'Man U' pieces, when two of the three shoes drop.
The Green Shoe, and the Red Shoe.
Only need the Blue Shoe, and then Man U will be walking hard.
Look, folks, the 'Man U' official colours are Blue, Red, and Green. And I'm not taking any of these materials back, ok? The colours are picked, and they ain't changing.
The Graphic Arts tail wags the Party Dog this time.
(Hello Blue Rod.
Had enough time off yet?
Time to get busy, compadre. Man U needs your colour, ok?)
Ok, so, like I was saying, the three parties unite under one tent, and go all-out against the Kings and Queen's of Orange. Obvious enough.
If this was just about two parties joining, sure, we'd all yawn, right? Believe me, it ain't that.
The 'real' journalists thinks Uniting Green and Red is about 'saving / growing their little parties'. Go read the Freep article today, you'll see.
Hey, real journalist. Maybe you should think a little bit about what happens when the conservative base looks at the last Liberal platform and says,
'Gee Martha... they are much more fiscally conservative and responsible that the PC's....'
'And that nice Dr. Gerrard would never privatize Hydro, Stanley.'
'And those Greens actually seem to care about farmers, Martha. Look, they even understand the whole watershed issue out here in the country... Hair's a little long, but so was cousin Eddie's, and he turned out all right.'
'Stanley, I heard they want to change the voting system, let people have their say about who they like, and who they don't like.'
'Well, you don't say, Martha... you don't say...."
(Give a farmer a chance to gripe a little, and you will make one man happier.)
Do you get this vision, my Freep friends? Are you feeling the real potential behind Man U?
Well, if you aren't, that's ok. Its pretty bold stuff, this sea-change in Manitoba Politics. Takes a while to really sink in. Just stay open, alright?
(Toodle, doodle, doo... one Blue Shoe....)
Ciao, folks.
Writing away on the next installment of of the 'Man U' pieces, when two of the three shoes drop.
The Green Shoe, and the Red Shoe.
Only need the Blue Shoe, and then Man U will be walking hard.
Look, folks, the 'Man U' official colours are Blue, Red, and Green. And I'm not taking any of these materials back, ok? The colours are picked, and they ain't changing.
The Graphic Arts tail wags the Party Dog this time.
(Hello Blue Rod.
Had enough time off yet?
Time to get busy, compadre. Man U needs your colour, ok?)
Ok, so, like I was saying, the three parties unite under one tent, and go all-out against the Kings and Queen's of Orange. Obvious enough.
If this was just about two parties joining, sure, we'd all yawn, right? Believe me, it ain't that.
The 'real' journalists thinks Uniting Green and Red is about 'saving / growing their little parties'. Go read the Freep article today, you'll see.
Hey, real journalist. Maybe you should think a little bit about what happens when the conservative base looks at the last Liberal platform and says,
'Gee Martha... they are much more fiscally conservative and responsible that the PC's....'
'And that nice Dr. Gerrard would never privatize Hydro, Stanley.'
'And those Greens actually seem to care about farmers, Martha. Look, they even understand the whole watershed issue out here in the country... Hair's a little long, but so was cousin Eddie's, and he turned out all right.'
'Stanley, I heard they want to change the voting system, let people have their say about who they like, and who they don't like.'
'Well, you don't say, Martha... you don't say...."
(Give a farmer a chance to gripe a little, and you will make one man happier.)
Do you get this vision, my Freep friends? Are you feeling the real potential behind Man U?
Well, if you aren't, that's ok. Its pretty bold stuff, this sea-change in Manitoba Politics. Takes a while to really sink in. Just stay open, alright?
(Toodle, doodle, doo... one Blue Shoe....)
Ciao, folks.
Wednesday, 18 January 2012
United Review 1: In Support and Against 'Man U'
(Sneaky Man U usage, hmmm? You think Manchester United's copy write protection would extend to cover my little theft? Not bloody likely, eh, wot?
Its not an admission of theft, Legal. Just stirring the fun pot, s'all.)
Let's begin a year long review of the reasons why, and why not, to Unite all other political factions in Manitoba to run against the NDP Government, including some how's and why's for the whole thing, with an article on the heart of the for-and-against argument, and a big fat run on sentence. Run-on having been accomplished, let's proceed with the rest.
A. Why Not to Unite
Coming together under one roof, so to speak, has one serious drawback; the people you suddenly find yourself shoulder to shoulder with.
I heard this at just such a party (in my mind...)
'So Jon says to James, 'I really did like your carr-uncy idea. Barter with vegetables might spark rural entrepreneurs to supply more local produce.' And Hugh says, 'But Jon, how the hell do we list that on the Exchange...?' James says, 'Carbon Credits, Hugh. Carbon Credits.' Then James looks at Jon and rolls his eyes, you know that look.....
Who's gonna blink, folks? Who will give up on their core beliefs to pitch in with the 'other guys'? It's like the geeks and the hippies and the jocks all coming together in some raucous teen dramady where the pimply-faced factions unite to stop something... something important to them all..... something they never faced before in their pampered, sheltered childhoods. A coming of age story in Keystone rather than Devon.
What could spur such famous foes to pitch the big United tent and play the most important game of their lives, together, as a team?
Watch your coming of age teen dramadies, kiddies. Its all about the love interest they share. She who crosses all cliques, who digs nobel response from pocket protector, jock strap, and jean jacket. The lady with the secret which, once revealed, spurs even the most hardened clique leader to secret meeting with his most bitter, bitter rivals. (Uh, yeah, ladies, trade genders in the above as you wish. Its a device, not a male dominated society admission. Cool, thanks.)
So, gentle reader, ask yourself this; what could our three leaders love so selflessly that they would turn from tradition and historic trajectory towards a sardine can full of bitter enemies?
Go on, ask yourself.
If you can't find an answer, don't worry. You are in good company, as it appears that no-one knows.
(Yet.)
So, the main argument against 'Man U' (aka The Manitoba United Party) is this: The established parties and their leaders do not seem to love anything more than their own interests.
Heartbreaking. And I mean that most sincerely.
To be sure, all other complex, persnickety, pesky problems involving uniting into one party flow from this lack of selfless, sacrificing, super-love to unite them. Trapped in their cliques, the Keystone High School kids are doomed to forever lose the big homecoming game to the Dipper High team, and the head cheerleader will once again lose the bet and have to... ummm... I guess this is a family blog, you'll have to imagine what she has to do (hint: it ain't pretty.)
Lets see if we can help those Keystone High kids this time.
B. Why to Unite
(Cue Holly Cole, 'My Foolish Heart: "This time its loooovvee.... this time its love, My, Fooooo-lish, Heaaart...."
I love her so much.)
Anyways, let's cut to the chase on 'why to unite' against the NDP (aka The Kings and Queens of Orange).
NEWSFLASH: First-Past-The-Post Voting System Corrupting Democracy in Keystone Province, Plethora of Parties Leads to Appointment of New Monarchy
Ummm... Natural Ruling Party? Heard of it? Do you get what they mean when they call themselves (or are called) the natural ruling party either Federally or Provincially? Remember when they used to say 'I rule by rights given to me by God..."
Natural Ruling Party means that, by pandering to a rock-solid core of their most zealous supporters, that party can defeat the other parties through vote splitting. Every time, forever, or until the cows come home with the flying pigs in tow.
That such a party exists means that a core principle has been cut from the Democratic Apple, being, that there is a GOVERNMENT IN WAITING WHO IS HER (HIS) MAJESTY'S MOST LOYAL OPPOSITION*.
The test of the true mettle of those drawn to politics is never found in the hall of power. It is found in the vestibule, the gallery, the groundswell, the answer to the cry of the mother who weeps for a child cruelly mistreated by The Government.
The test for those crazy Keystone High School kids isn't how well they would govern. It is how well they react to the condition which causes them to always fail separately. They are tested best when they are powerless.
It is why they are the most loyal, serving the Queen (King) despite not being in power. In fact, such service is the highest form, the most nobel, and that service is relied upon most heavily by the Queen (King) for the democratic system to function as intended.
Without such selfless service, the party in power stays in power, indefinitely, and they can do whatever the hell they like, right? I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but that is a fact, right?
Further, and listen closely: by failing in their duty to Her Majesty, the Keystone kids are actually letting vile usurpers walk right in the front door of the palace. By failing to provide an alternative to the NDP government, the other parties are causing, in effect, a new Monarchy to form.
(Yes, this is why I have been calling them the Kings and Queens of Orange. Now you get it, right? Good.)
Her Majesty is to represent her office as best she can. Her office represent the highest form of nobility, the best of us, our pinnacle, our ideal. She travels, speaks, signs, presides over, causes, and inspires the rest of us to do the very best we can for her most sacred trust: the well being of her Citizens.
Her Citizens are our children. They are our wives, our husbands, mothers, fathers, friends and foes, families and the family-less. Rich, poor, and all gradients in between. They is us, all of us.
So by failing to selflessly love her Majesty's office, the Keystone kids remain powerless to stop the vile usurpers in the Natural Ruling Party. The new Kings and Queens serve only their friends, and not 'the people', because they can, and because it works for them in the first past the post system. Yes, same for the Federal King, his Highness Harper. Same thing, same results.
In Manitoba, the homecoming game is lost, the cheerleader (yes, folks, its the Queen) has her fate sealed, and the kids hang their heads, in shame, once again. Damn. If only....
(Now tell me, doesn't this sound like a much better description of what is happening in Manitoban politics today than the other pundits have poured out thus far? Thanks. I need the stroking.)
So, why unite?
To save the Queen, 'natch. I'm telling you, its always about that selfless love thing.
In Summation:
This last Manitoba Provincial election taught all three losing parties that they cannot form government under these current conditions. Yes, blame the voting system, but also blame those who played right into it.
To continue along this path, I am of the opinion that the three parties (you like this James? I'm totally including you guys, and I mean it) are committing an act that will, in the future, be seen as nothing short of treasonous. Continuing on this way is against the Queen, her subjects, and against democracy.
And now the hammer: either we abandon, wholesale, the Keystone leaders and their cliques in order to form a new United party, or we are just as guilty as they are, and shame on us.
That is... unless they see clearly the folly of their ways, get together, and pitch the tent.
(The big game is 3.5 years away, boys. Do not wait until it is 2 years away, or it could be too late.)
NEXT UP: The Rod Rouge plows 9.5 years into the future to find the United Party un-United, but in a very different (see: non-treasonous) way.
Oh, those crazy Keystone kids!!
PS: I'm going to work hard over the next year. Oh, boy, would I ever appreciate more links on folks' blogs....
* Stylin' formatting inspired by the Black Rod's Blog, All Rights Reserved.
Its not an admission of theft, Legal. Just stirring the fun pot, s'all.)
Let's begin a year long review of the reasons why, and why not, to Unite all other political factions in Manitoba to run against the NDP Government, including some how's and why's for the whole thing, with an article on the heart of the for-and-against argument, and a big fat run on sentence. Run-on having been accomplished, let's proceed with the rest.
A. Why Not to Unite
Coming together under one roof, so to speak, has one serious drawback; the people you suddenly find yourself shoulder to shoulder with.
I heard this at just such a party (in my mind...)
'So Jon says to James, 'I really did like your carr-uncy idea. Barter with vegetables might spark rural entrepreneurs to supply more local produce.' And Hugh says, 'But Jon, how the hell do we list that on the Exchange...?' James says, 'Carbon Credits, Hugh. Carbon Credits.' Then James looks at Jon and rolls his eyes, you know that look.....
Who's gonna blink, folks? Who will give up on their core beliefs to pitch in with the 'other guys'? It's like the geeks and the hippies and the jocks all coming together in some raucous teen dramady where the pimply-faced factions unite to stop something... something important to them all..... something they never faced before in their pampered, sheltered childhoods. A coming of age story in Keystone rather than Devon.
What could spur such famous foes to pitch the big United tent and play the most important game of their lives, together, as a team?
Watch your coming of age teen dramadies, kiddies. Its all about the love interest they share. She who crosses all cliques, who digs nobel response from pocket protector, jock strap, and jean jacket. The lady with the secret which, once revealed, spurs even the most hardened clique leader to secret meeting with his most bitter, bitter rivals. (Uh, yeah, ladies, trade genders in the above as you wish. Its a device, not a male dominated society admission. Cool, thanks.)
So, gentle reader, ask yourself this; what could our three leaders love so selflessly that they would turn from tradition and historic trajectory towards a sardine can full of bitter enemies?
Go on, ask yourself.
If you can't find an answer, don't worry. You are in good company, as it appears that no-one knows.
(Yet.)
So, the main argument against 'Man U' (aka The Manitoba United Party) is this: The established parties and their leaders do not seem to love anything more than their own interests.
Heartbreaking. And I mean that most sincerely.
To be sure, all other complex, persnickety, pesky problems involving uniting into one party flow from this lack of selfless, sacrificing, super-love to unite them. Trapped in their cliques, the Keystone High School kids are doomed to forever lose the big homecoming game to the Dipper High team, and the head cheerleader will once again lose the bet and have to... ummm... I guess this is a family blog, you'll have to imagine what she has to do (hint: it ain't pretty.)
Lets see if we can help those Keystone High kids this time.
B. Why to Unite
(Cue Holly Cole, 'My Foolish Heart: "This time its loooovvee.... this time its love, My, Fooooo-lish, Heaaart...."
I love her so much.)
Anyways, let's cut to the chase on 'why to unite' against the NDP (aka The Kings and Queens of Orange).
NEWSFLASH: First-Past-The-Post Voting System Corrupting Democracy in Keystone Province, Plethora of Parties Leads to Appointment of New Monarchy
Ummm... Natural Ruling Party? Heard of it? Do you get what they mean when they call themselves (or are called) the natural ruling party either Federally or Provincially? Remember when they used to say 'I rule by rights given to me by God..."
Natural Ruling Party means that, by pandering to a rock-solid core of their most zealous supporters, that party can defeat the other parties through vote splitting. Every time, forever, or until the cows come home with the flying pigs in tow.
That such a party exists means that a core principle has been cut from the Democratic Apple, being, that there is a GOVERNMENT IN WAITING WHO IS HER (HIS) MAJESTY'S MOST LOYAL OPPOSITION*.
The test of the true mettle of those drawn to politics is never found in the hall of power. It is found in the vestibule, the gallery, the groundswell, the answer to the cry of the mother who weeps for a child cruelly mistreated by The Government.
The test for those crazy Keystone High School kids isn't how well they would govern. It is how well they react to the condition which causes them to always fail separately. They are tested best when they are powerless.
It is why they are the most loyal, serving the Queen (King) despite not being in power. In fact, such service is the highest form, the most nobel, and that service is relied upon most heavily by the Queen (King) for the democratic system to function as intended.
Without such selfless service, the party in power stays in power, indefinitely, and they can do whatever the hell they like, right? I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but that is a fact, right?
Further, and listen closely: by failing in their duty to Her Majesty, the Keystone kids are actually letting vile usurpers walk right in the front door of the palace. By failing to provide an alternative to the NDP government, the other parties are causing, in effect, a new Monarchy to form.
(Yes, this is why I have been calling them the Kings and Queens of Orange. Now you get it, right? Good.)
Her Majesty is to represent her office as best she can. Her office represent the highest form of nobility, the best of us, our pinnacle, our ideal. She travels, speaks, signs, presides over, causes, and inspires the rest of us to do the very best we can for her most sacred trust: the well being of her Citizens.
Her Citizens are our children. They are our wives, our husbands, mothers, fathers, friends and foes, families and the family-less. Rich, poor, and all gradients in between. They is us, all of us.
So by failing to selflessly love her Majesty's office, the Keystone kids remain powerless to stop the vile usurpers in the Natural Ruling Party. The new Kings and Queens serve only their friends, and not 'the people', because they can, and because it works for them in the first past the post system. Yes, same for the Federal King, his Highness Harper. Same thing, same results.
In Manitoba, the homecoming game is lost, the cheerleader (yes, folks, its the Queen) has her fate sealed, and the kids hang their heads, in shame, once again. Damn. If only....
(Now tell me, doesn't this sound like a much better description of what is happening in Manitoban politics today than the other pundits have poured out thus far? Thanks. I need the stroking.)
So, why unite?
To save the Queen, 'natch. I'm telling you, its always about that selfless love thing.
In Summation:
This last Manitoba Provincial election taught all three losing parties that they cannot form government under these current conditions. Yes, blame the voting system, but also blame those who played right into it.
To continue along this path, I am of the opinion that the three parties (you like this James? I'm totally including you guys, and I mean it) are committing an act that will, in the future, be seen as nothing short of treasonous. Continuing on this way is against the Queen, her subjects, and against democracy.
And now the hammer: either we abandon, wholesale, the Keystone leaders and their cliques in order to form a new United party, or we are just as guilty as they are, and shame on us.
That is... unless they see clearly the folly of their ways, get together, and pitch the tent.
(The big game is 3.5 years away, boys. Do not wait until it is 2 years away, or it could be too late.)
NEXT UP: The Rod Rouge plows 9.5 years into the future to find the United Party un-United, but in a very different (see: non-treasonous) way.
Oh, those crazy Keystone kids!!
PS: I'm going to work hard over the next year. Oh, boy, would I ever appreciate more links on folks' blogs....
* Stylin' formatting inspired by the Black Rod's Blog, All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)