The sky is not falling Chicken Little

In the days since the Presidential election the media has been rife with opinions on how and why Mitt Romney took second place. Commentators, talk show hosts, or political pundits all have a wealth of suggestions about what changes the Republican party must undertake to win the Whitehouse in 2016. Most of these suggestions tend to cover the same ground, the  Republicans need to get in touch with and win over the Latino vote,  single woman, African Americans, soften their stance on different issues, or learn to sling mud like their opponents.

This election is lost and there's no changing that fact. However, what a lot of this opinionated discussion overlooks is the fact that what America really needs at this moment in history and for the foreseeable future is a President who has truly bought into and believes in a Conservative platform , who places the interests of the nation before their own or their parties. An individual that fully understands the precarious financial position the nation is in and the dire consequences that it is facing due to a succession of free spending fiscally irresponsible federal governments. What America definitely does not need is a another leader who caters to the whims of every ethnic or special interest group as a means of winning their support and the Oval Office. Unfortunately for the last four years and the next four, America has a guy in the Oval Office with feet of clay whose only goal in life is retaining power long enough to see his personal agenda reshape the nation. As a means to do so Mr Obama will promise and do whatever it takes, something he learnt well in the Chicago political arena. He and his party proved themselves the masters of falsehoods and mudslinging over the last six months.And please don't get me started on his promise of open government and transparency..... sheesh. America has never experienced a more clandestine administration, two great examples are the "Fast and Furious" and "Benghazi" fiascoes. These guys would shame even Tricky Dick Nixon

Was Mitt Romney the man America truly needed in the Oval Office?  Probably not, but on the flip side he was a lot closer than the one they have.

Does such an individual exist and if they do is there even a remote chance they would survive the primaries or have even the faintest hope of becoming President? The primaries would certainly be a challenge as the upper echelon of the GOP are not exactly risk takers when it comes to their candidates and certainly respect a pecking order. What the GOP needs is another Ronald Reagan type individual, someone that stands on his principals knowing full well that in doing so he is bucking the "old boys club" in the party. However the electorate might very well reject just such an individual on the basis they simply have become very used to the idea that government provides everything and nurse maids them from cradle to grave. Americans might not be prepared for or even desire a more self-reliant existence, many of them might be very comfortable in their nanny state stupor.

My personal opinion is that the Right must go back to it's conservative values, and I am not referring to issues surrounding abortion or same sex marriage, these are societal and religious ones, not governmental ones. The conservative values I speak of are those of smaller government and sound fiscal management. The country is heading over the fiscal cliff, yes they may postpone it this year, but with current spending practices it is inevitable. Until Washington begins practicing sound fiscal management, and more importantly until the Oval Office has an individual in it that understands their job is to lead the country, not kowtow to every group that promises support, the country will remain on the same Greece like path. A true leader understands that at times they must make unpopular decisions, ones that look further forward than the next election. A true leader does not check the direction the political wind is blowing every morning upon getting out of bed (frankly I am surprised Obama has not had a weather vane installed atop the Whitehouse).

What the GOP does not need under any circumstances is a candidate that will cater to passing whims of this group or that group in hopes of currying favour and winning the Oval Office.  The GOP can not "outbid" the Democrats with promises, nor should they. After all, if they play that game we will simple see two versions of the Democrat party running for the Presidency in 2016 and the ultimate loser will be the American citizenry and the rest of the world.

On a last note, the good news is that Obama is now in his Legacy term of office, more to the point is the fact that after the first two years or so he will effectively become a lame duck President as Democrat politicians try to put some distance between themselves and him prior to the next election. So hopefully he won't cause much havoc or do too much more harm to the nation and the world.

The NDP, Stupid is as Stupid does

It's no secret that I am not a big supporter of the Leftwing politics of the NDP, but to be fair I do realize that they have a place in the Canadian political landscape. Any political system to be truly balanced  needs to represent both sides of the political spectrum. Besides, in present Canadian Federal politics there is so little difference between the Liberal party and the NDP that even each parties supporters are confused. So if nothing else this tends to keep the Left in disarray, generally a good condition for them to be in as far as most sensible individuals are concerned.

Usually I am not the least bit surprised by any of  the socialist nonsense that the NDP generates on a regular basis, and I long ago stopped scratching my head trying to understand their logic. Having said that, recently the NDP surprised even me.

It's seems that last week the Federal Government announced that they had managed to cut their budgeted spending over the course of the fiscal year by $8 billion. Now generally anytime a government spends less than planned it is a cause for celebration, particularly due to the fact that it occurs on about the same frequency as  a pass by from Haley's Comet. Unfortunately this impudence on the part of the Feds did not sit well with the NDP who naturally felt something was amiss. After all an unspent taxpayer dollar is a wasted dollar in the mind of the NDP,  worse yet is the potential loss of an entitlement program, even one that serves no rational purpose. Never mind the fact that every dollar our Federal government spends is a borrowed dollar that adds to our ever growing Federal debt. So exactly how did the Federal NDP party view this "travesty"?

"It speaks to the lack of transparency and really the fundamental lack of accountability with Canadians," NDP finance critic Peggy Nash stated to the Globe and Mail. "People need to know what programs are being cut, what services are being undermined." 

Too funny....Let me get this straight, the programs that Peggy believes are being cut and the services that she suggests are being undermined are of such great importance that unless the government notifies us what they are, we might miss the entire event?  Really, is this the best she and her party have to offer Canadians? Peggy must be very familiar with the story of Chicken Little!

The ironic thing is that the Feds actually released Public Accounts' documentation last week that clearly indicated where the bulk of the savings were achieved. 

- $6.3 billion was originally budgeted for infrastructure and. $4.5 billion was actually spent.

- Ottawa spent almost $2 billion less than expected on Employment Insurance benefits.

-  The B.C. Provincial government returned $1.6 billion to the Feds after opting out of the HST.

As the official opposition the role of the NDP is to keep tabs on the government, but use some common sense please, there are plenty of places to find fault with our current government, you don't need to create issues where they don't exist. Speaking strictly from the viewpoint of a taxpayer, anytime the government shaves 25% off of a projected annual deficit of  $32 Billion, I am a happy camper. Too bad for the NDP that they don't see this as a good thing as well.

On a last note for my American friends who are reading this,  yes the dollar amounts cited above are correct. I can only imagine knowing this makes you feel even worse about your own Federal governments fiscal irresponsibility that is leading you over a fiscal cliff. You have my sympathy and I hope that Tuesday brings you a positive change in the Oval Office.

Renovating the den, while he kitchen is on fire. Part 2

In Part One I discussed how our governments in both Canada and the United

States for all intents and purposes are simply ignoring the massive debts they are incurring. Sure, once in a while they pay lip service to the debt, but generally it is placed on the back burner. I detailed my thoughts on this in Part One, and since that time I have seen some classic examples of our elected officials focusing on minor issues and treating them as if they had the potential to change civilization.

Here is a real doozie!

It appears that both the American Congress and Senate are up in arms over the fact that the uniforms of the U.S. Olympic Team were manufactured in China. In fact a bill was introduced in the Senate that if passed, would require the US Olympic Committee (USOC) to outfit Olympic athletes in ceremonial uniforms "sewn or assembled in the United States."

Let me get this straight, in the midst of what could possibly be considered the second worst financial crisis in American history (a close second right after the Great Depression) and at a time when government spending is spiraling out of control, it appears that the biggest concern of these elected officials is who did the sewing for Team USA! One can only imagine what this is costing the American taxpayer to have these individuals sit around and discuss the rag trade. I'm not making this up, trust me I am not that creative to imagine such stupidity. Sure, I realize that the uniforms are just a symptom of the bigger problem, the outsourcing of American jobs. However, that horse has left the barn!

Those of us on the right simply have to communicate better

I have never made any bones about the fact that I lean to the right in my political beliefs. Does that mean I believe that all things right are "right" (no pun intended, but it is an ironic use of words)?

Two entirely different directions take by
people often with the best of intentions

Of course not, I am not so naive as to believe the Conservative mindset can do no wrong, nor am I so ignorant to imagine that the Liberal train of thought is never right (that almost seems like an oxymoron). Although, what I do find of interest is that at times the personal commitment to a course of action by some on the Left is almost fanatical, (does the term "Occupy" come to mind?). If you have ever had the painful experience of attempting to have a rational discussion on a topic such as Health Care or Old Age Security with a committed "die-hard" Liberal or NDP voter you will know exactly what I am referring to. Unless you are willing to discuss increased public funding your opinions are generally met with disdain and any hope of your using a well thought out logical platform in an effort to get your viewpoint across is pointless. Any attempt on your part to suggest the merits of increased efficiency or private sector involvement in the health care system will almost certainly get you labeled as a heartless right wing fanatic that places profits before people.

Why? Well, what I have noticed over the years is that the Right and the Left approach political debates and discussion in completely different manners and from starting points that tend to be light years apart. The foundations that each side relies on when debating are simply put, like night and day.

The Right generally comes armed with facts, figures, statistics, examples, you name it they have done their home work and are are ready to prove their point in the harsh light of the day. Often they will turn to terms such as increased efficiency, user fees, or private sector involvement as avenues to explore with the goal of delivering a more affordable solution. No brainer, right? One would think so, but that is generally not the case.(again no pun intended, but the word "right" just makes so much sense so often, doesn't it)

The Left, in many cases will simply set the facts aside in favor of a formula that leads right (oops, did it again) to the support of the majority. So what is this magic formula?

Now this is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black......

"Sydney, what happened to you? You've become obese!"

Recently, Jim Flaherty Canada's Finance Minister has taken to publicly criticizing the spending habits of the provincial government of Ontario.

Now while I can't argue with the criticism nor would I in my wildest dreams ever consider defending Premier Dalton McGuinty and his merry band of free spending caucus members, I do have a problem with this.
Where do I start, well it seems Jimmy has suggested that the McGuinty Liberals should "look in the mirror" to see who is responsible for Ontario's current economic woes. A fine suggestion, but tell me Jimmy-Boy, do you own a mirror?

Rather than having me take off on a rant (something I tend to do occasionally), let's keep this short and use a couple of old but well proven adages that accurately describe this soap opera.......
"cast the first stone" or  "Those that live in glass houses....."

I am personally amazed that Jimmy feels he can tell anyone how to be fiscally responsible. It certainly is not based on his setting such a fine example to follow,  another old adage says it best  "Don't do as I do, do as I say"

On the other hand, maybe there is a simpler motivation at play here, like the fact that Jimmy's wife Christine Elliot is the deputy leader of Ontario's Conservative party. You know, the same Conservative party that would like to form the next government of Ontario and currently sits in opposition to McGuinty's Liberals.

So Jimmy, how about doing us taxpayers a couple of favors?
First, balance your own governments budget and address it's debt before you worry about the other guys, and secondly when your working on our nickel let your wife do her own campaigning.

Wanted: Premier for Ontario, No IQ test required

This week witnessed one of the most classic cases of  "foot in mouth" syndrome to have come along in a while, and lo and behold it came out of Ontario. The last time I can recall such stupidity from an Ontario politician was in January 1999 when Mayor Mel called in the army to perform snow removal in Toronto.  Then there was Bob Rae of course....

Recently Alberta's Premier Alison Redford sent a request to the Premier of Ontario Dalton McGuinty to show his support on selling the oil sands to the world, support that would be helpful at a time when Alberta energy is being referred to as "dirty oil" in some quarters. This undoubtedly seemed to Premier Redford to be a reasonable request considering the vital role Alberta's energy industry plays in the overall health of the Canadian economy.

Unfortunately Premier McGuinty apparently has a different opinion on Alberta's role in the Canadian economy, and particularly in regards to his own province. In fact rather than show his support for Alberta, he chastised our province and laid the blame for many of Ontario's financial woes right at our feet.

What's all the fuss about Old Age Security?

Like most people I see a day when retirement will be upon me. So while I am doing my best to build a nest egg for those years I also realize that I will be counting on the government for some of my retirement income.

This means that anytime our federal government discusses changes that may effect the retired segment of our population I listen up. Naturally when I recently heard Prime Minister Harper speak on the need for raising the age of eligibility for Old Age Security (OAS) to 67  from it's current 65 my ears perked up and I immediately assumed the worse. However like so much of what the mainstream media serves to us there is far more to it than meets the eye.

According To Jim, sadly not a sitcom but reality TV

I read with interest the statements made in late 2011 by Jim Flahery, our Federal Finance Minister. According to Jim (wait a moment, isn't that the name of a sitcom?), due to the weak economy federal revenues are less than expected, this in turn will result in a delay in balancing the budget. Now, According to Jim ( hehe...) the earliest the annual Federal deficit of approximately $31 billion will be eliminated is 2015/2016. Well Jim, although I am not a Finance Minister or even a sitting Member of Parliament, might I suggest a simpler more immediate solution to the deficit.

Adam... You hit the nail on the head!

Wow, driving to work yesterday I flipped on the radio and immediately was confronted with a political interview that sounded interesting. However after listening to it for just a few moments I thought that there must be a technical issue at the station as there was a continuous "beeping" sound present which cut out about every 4-5 words. Fortunately before I has the chance to change the station another voice cut in, one that I recognized and explained that what was being broadcast was a heavily censored political rant on the Occupy crowd by none other that Adam Carolla.

The reason for the censorship had nothing to do with the actual political content, but rather with the fact that Adam tends to use some colourful phrases (to say the least). However, listening around the "beeps" the message was loud and clear, and frankly as close to the truth as one could hope for. Adam's insight is something that I believe will strike a chord with most, in fact even those on the far left if they are honest with themselves will have to agree with a lot he has to say, although I suspect they would never openly admit it. He puts into words what most know, but fear to voice. Our boy Adam certainly has a pair of "stones".

But enough said, listen to Adam and let him explain. A word of caution, although this is the censored version you can fill in the blanks, but please don't ignore the message based on taking any offense to Adam's strong use of profanity.

Napping in Parliament? It's amazing anyone can stay awake

I got a kick out of all the fuss that is being raised about Calgary Mp Rob Anders dozing off during question period in Parliament.

First off let me say that I have no particular like or dislike for Sleepy Rob, like most of the individuals we send to Ottawa once he arrived he forget why we sent him and went about doing things the way his party instructed him to. However, if you have ever watched our elected representatives during a question period it is understandable that occasionally someone will doze off, on the excitement scale it rates lower than watching paint dry or a Sunday afternoon of CBC. At times the bickering, insults, and stupidity that is displayed is akin to a elementary school playground. In fact I would personally recommend watching a question period for anyone who suffers from insomnia, it works wonders and is non habit forming.

Here is the video that has caused so much excitement, but be forewarned, even at a mere 37 seconds in length you may find yourself nodding off as you watch it. 

By the way in case you  have difficulty trying to determine who is awake and
who is napping Rob is the one taking off his glasses behind the speaker.

Wisdom from Canada's best and brightest? You be the judge

After posting yesterday about John Crosbie and his unique brand of wisdom I got to thinking it might be interesting to further explore Canada's political braintrust over the years.  So after doing some research on the internet (isn't it grand?) I found literally hundred's of pearls of wisdom that have come from the lips of Canadian politicians. I sifted through them for ones that truly reflected the intelligence of the speaker so here goes nothing......

• "As longs as I'm saying what I really think, I'm prepared to stand by it"
  Vancouver Sun 1983, Kim Campbell (Short term PM,  AKA Mulroney Sacrificial Lamb)
• "I'm not going to play politics on the floor of the House of Commons"
  House of Commons 1987, John Turner (Short Term PM, AKA Trudeau Lap Dog)
• "Popularity is bad for you..I try to avoid it like the plaque, and I've been reasonably successful"
  Election Campaign 1992, Brian Mulroney (PM for 3 terms, for the most part 2 and a bit too many)
• "My strategy has always been to stay on course unless a change, of course is announced. And if it is, of course, we will announce it"
  Speaking about his governments economic policy 1984, John Turner PM ( see above for character description)

 Had enough "wisdom" yet..... If not there is more to follow