INFO-Tain-ment

Friday, December 19, 2008

Protecting Alex Rodriguez - and not from Material Girls

Ok- the yanks have done EXTREMELY well in the off season this year. It is pretty clear that the only rotation that can even pretend to be as good as theirs is Boston's - but still CC, Wang, Joba, Burnett and presumably Andy Pettitte is a Hall of Fame Starting five. Period. It was worth every penny. I think there is a legitimate chance for CC to win more than 26 games this year. He just needs to pitch solid and he will be guaranteed 20 based on his current ERA/WHIP.

Their current offensive line-up is also really good:

Damon, Jeter, X (presumably Nady), Arod, Matsui, Posada, Cano, Cabrerra and Swisher is not friggin' bad.

That said, they need to fill TWO significant holes - and they can probably do it with one person

1) They need to get another power hitter. You can't protect Alex Rodriguez with Derek Jeter and Hideki Matsui. Jason Giambi being gone actually leaves a very large hole, and his replacement is fighting with Melky for who gets to hit 9th.

2) They need a REAL outfielder. Damon is a hitter who is forced to make comedic errors. Melky is a young kid who chases balls like a retarded puppy. Matsui can't run to shag flies.

I think they re-sign Bobby Abreu - I will admit my bias- I love Bobby because I caught a foul ball he hit. Pay him 10-12 Million for three years. He would be insane to turn that down - knowing that he will get to the World Series. Nady and Gardner are solid, but not spectacular - Nady's numbers are inflated because he spent half the year with the Pirates.

They could also go after Manny. But that only solves the first problem- it makes the second problem worse. But at that point, we would be talking about a team that would average seven runs a game - so what are a few errors? And the pissing off the Red Sox factor has to be HUGE here. Manny hitting one out of Fenway in Pinstripes is something I would pay upwards of $1,000.00 to watch live. In the playoffs? Five times that.

Yvan Rodriguez was a total bust as a Yankee. Go back to Detroit you lousy bum. Too bad they missed on Raúl Ibañez - who was picked up by the world champs. Wow - great pick up there. Shelley Duncan had the Major League Record for most Home Runs in his first 20 at bats (6) - sadly, the next 400 at bats weren't so hot. He might get better, but he is still a clown show in the field. Last year's Shelley Duncan - Cody Ransom - also petered out.

I think the solution is Adam Dunn from CIN/ARZ. He hit 40 homers last year.

Any way you cut it- I can't wait for April. Any bets?

Thursday, December 18, 2008

People who ACTUALLY deserve to go in the Senate

I don't pretend to think that there are people who I like who are going to become Senators.

In fact, I think it less likely that I will like any of them.

But, here is my short list of "tolerable" tories who should go in:

1) Pat Binns. Ireland is nice, but the Senate is better.

2) Mario Dumont - maybe not a real tory - but definitely interested in Institutional Renewal.

3) Bernard Lord - of course, we know he doesn't want to go in because he has another job in mind.

4) John Reynolds - won't be in long- but his political history is long indeed.

5) Greg Thompson - open up a new cabinet seat for god's sake.

6) Mike Harris - he can officially tell Baird, Clement and Flaherty what to do. Love 'im or hate 'im - he is an excellent politician.

7) Ian Brodie/Neil Nevitte/Tom Flanagan - one of the Calgary Kabal deserve a slot.

8) Norm Sterling/Bob Runcimen - open a seat for John Tory - PLEASE - he could only be more inept if he was actually in the Legislature.

9) Michael Wilson. He has done just fine in Washington. Now it is time for someone who can keep up with the new administration.

10) Barbara MacDougall (sp?) - smart, mostly liberal-minded, and a fine voice in caucus.

You will note that there are not a lot of high profile tories who don't have a penis...If I knew more women tories, I would certainly include them.

11) Bob Mills

12) Ralph Klein - for shits and giggles alone.

13) Gary Filmon - another former Premier.

Of course, I don't know why they are limiting themselves to 18 - Mulroney and Chretien both appointed beyond the set number of Senators for their own interests. He is allowed- so do it- get it closer to that elusive split.

And, out of respect - He should invite a few liberal MPs who are in the House - a) open the seats for by-elections he could/should win in the current post coalition climate and b) reward hard workers for hard work. My list would include Dion, but its really about grooming Ken Dryden to be the Governor General. Of course, this defeats the "purpose" of stacking the Senate to bolster reform initiatives - or does it?

Tory MPs who could go up include: John Cummins, Bill Casey (not really a Tory, but a good idea regardless), Inky Mark (Ras al Ghul - check out the fu-man-chu), Merv Tweed, Vic Toews (solves another problem...), and Peter Goldring (love the new province.)

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Lobbying Registration

According to several news outlets, there has been a deluge of activity as various aspirant Senators seek to be appointed to higher office.

As an FYI -

5. (1) An individual shall file
with the Commissioner, in the prescribed form and manner, a return setting out
the information referred to in subsection (2), if the individual, for payment,
on behalf of any person or organization (in this section referred to as the
“client”), undertakes to

(a) communicate with a public office holder in respect of

(v) the awarding of any grant, contribution or other financial benefit by
or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada,


Just so we are clear - if your boss tells you to call your public office holder to see if he/she could be a Senator...

What a clown show.

Monday, December 15, 2008

The Tri-partite battle on climate change

I remember when "State v. Federal Government" was a battle between an anxious Governor in California (D - Totally Recalled) and George Bush (R - Don't mess with Texas, either). Then it evolved into an emboldened Governor in California (R -the Hummerator) and a bunch of other enlightened states, who pulled in a handful of Canadian provinces.

At all times, however, the battle has been how the Feds (Canadian and Americain) weren't doing enough to fight climate change.

Apparently there is a new cabal of governors/Premiers who think the feds will be doing to much and it will disproportionately affect their states provinces.

I don't think I need to tell you who they are - but Rick Perry (R - from GWB's Texas), Ed Stelmach (C - not quite what Harper wanted) and Sarah Palin (R - Hockey Mom) are forming their own West Coast Climate initiative - except the goals are the opposite of the WCI.

It is kind of fun to watch. None of them believe in Dinosaurs.

I think that should be a pre-condition for elected office.


_______________


Is Alberta ready for Sarah Palin?
The Calgary Sun
Monday, December 15, 2008
Page: 15 Section: Editorial/Opinion
Byline: BY NEIL WAUGH

You can't put lipstick on this pig either.

With Premier Ed Stelmach scheduled to wing to the Lone Star State today for important talks with Texas Governor Rick Perry, it appears another energy player is about to hit the ice.

America's favourite hockey mom, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, could be joining Steady Eddie's team when an Alberta government delegation heads north early in the new year to possibly form a state-provincial front against tough new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency carbon emission rules.

Which will inevitably spill over into the North America-wide carbon cap and trade deal that Prime Minister and token Alberta MP Stephen Harper vowed he wants to negotiate with Barack Obama.

In a hot letter to EPA officials Perry complained about the "disproportionate impact on Texas." And how "ripple effects will be felt throughout the national economy."

The last thing the U.S. or Canadian economies need right now is more ripples.

Perry goes on to accuse Washington of "intentionally crippling" his state's energy, agriculture and manufacturing sectors.

Which would "irreparably damage an already fragile national economy."

No one knows that more than Palin, who right now would be trying to rescue the world's largest economy from the trauma centre had she become the Republican vice-president.

Alaska is already feeling the pinch. Today Palin will reveal her 2009 budget.

She has already alerted state legislators to expect an economic game plan that will "stress fiscal conservatism."

"There is no need to panic," she said in reacting to the recent nose-dive in oil prices.

"A few short years ago $40-a-barrel oil would have been great news for Alaska."

That's why the Alaska government is putting so much faith in the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act she signed earlier this month with Calgary's TransCanada Pipelines to build a 48-inch natural gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to the Alberta Hub at Empress.

She called it a "long deferred dream" to bring Alaska's resources to market.

Just like Alberta's diminished fiscal status, not exactly a good time to impose new charges and taxes on energy producing areas in the name of greenhouse gases.

That's what will be on the agenda Jan. 2 and 3 when an Alberta delegation rushes north to Alaska to help Palin celebrate her state's 50 anniversary and talk about what kind of economic punishment Ottawa and Washington are cooking up.

"There are any number of reasons for Alaska officials to welcome Alberta's delegation," governor's office spokesman Bill McAlister said.

"Governor Palin is always concerned when the federal government does anything that could hamper oil and gas exploration and development."

That's the message Stelmach takes to Austin today when he describes Texas and Alberta as "pillars of North American energy economy."

"It's critical for our jurisdictions to work together," the premier said about the two-day meeting, which his office calls a "summit."

Whatever deal Steady Eddie can cut with the Texas governor will be used to build on the Coalition West meeting scheduled for Jan. 12.

That's where the seven western premiers will hammer out a common front to take to the first minister's budget meeting with the prime minister.

Stelmach is putting the final touches on a shopping list for a piece of Harper's "significant" stimulation package.

This includes a major financial commitment from the feds for carbon capture and storage, a promise to back off any punitive measures that could harm the only industrial sector in the country still firing on most cylinders --and infrastructure bucks.

And Stelmach's favourite, removal of interprovincial trade barriers.

Eddie is ready for Alaska. But are Albertans ready for Sarah?

Thursday, December 11, 2008

They say these things come in threes...Harper and the Senate

About a month ago I wrote this little piece about why Harper should use the Senate to reform the Senate

The only other prediction that I have hanging out there is that the Quebec Nordiques will win a cup before 2020.

It begins anew

Best Pitcher in Baseball - CC Sabathia.

Biggest wallet in Baseball - New York Yankees.

The world is right again.

Why am I not surprised

Apparently, Parliament isn't the only clown show in Ottawa right now.

Today, the Supreme Court made two huge mistakes - but who should be surprised:

1) It called Employment Insurance a tax (it isn't, its insurance); and
2) It said that cabinet decisions that set the rates violate the taxation v. representation principles - that only the Commons can amend tax rates.

So, what is the executive going to do tomorrow to complete this triple play of lunacy.

I can't wait for Christmas.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Essential Services

Why isn't public transportation an essential service?

Please, tell me.

Not that I give a fuck- I have a large SUV - but still. I think it is an essential service.

I have yet to meet anyone in favour of this strike.

PS - I want to be the Car Czar.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

His Caucus Support grew three sizes this day



But why, did you ask, does Ms. Who look so Sad?

She was told Democracy works, by her loving old Dad.

Now that the Grinch has taken the lead,

Let's hope public support can no longer bleed.

To the left, to the right, or voters stay home,

Liberal support is now entrusted to a BBC Gnome.

There is no doubt that he is the best left to stand,

Let's hope that he can rescue our brand.

I am wishing for Jean, to come back and save us

But I know that would be too much of a fuss.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

Thank God

At first it was exciting. I was into it. I thought - Man, why didn't we do this two years ago?

Then, it came to me - what the fuck were we thinking? How can we simultaneously prop up our competition on the left - legitimizing them, while giving the competition on the right another kick at the "entitlement" debate. It was not very well thought out, to say the least.

There are two new ideas I have

1) There is a difference between being correct and being right.

2) What is the point of being right, if it costs you everything?

To quote from one of the best modern day philosophers, the Liberals "...were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should." This would have come back and bit the Liberals on the ass harder than any T-rex could.

Admittedly, it has been both interesting and exciting. Forming the government right now might have been really good for Canada - I truly believe that. It would have definitely been really bad for Liberals. In a battle of historical examples, the people who consistently tell you why what they are doing is legal are often doing so because they can't justify why it is right.

In a Parliamentary Democracy where the constitutional powers of the Governor General are not defined, but were assumed over time - the only precedent that matters is the rule of law. That rule of law, sadly, is NOT based on precedent - the GG can prorogue if she wants to. The Prime Minister has to resign. Everyone keeps forgetting that. I don't know why.

Liberals are correct that in a Parliamentary Democracy the control of the House is rooted the confidence of this House. Liberals are correct that other countries survive with coalition governments. Though, I might argue that they survive despite them. They are also a little more 'used' to it then we are. Off the record, I am not so sure comparing us to Israel or Italy is a good idea.

The Prime Minister is right, if not correct, when he says nobody voted for this. Over the past years, eons, decades - our institutions and the conventions surrounding them have not been tested this way. In fact, the last precedent for this, in Ontario - led to the political demise of the person who led the newfangled coalition. They didn't get back to power for 15 years.

Great idea guys.

Regardless, the first reference case on unilateralism (1980) noted that while Mr. Trudeau *COULD* just go to London and amend the constitution, he really SHOULD NOT. He didn't have to test that power. Legally, both were correct. Morally, Trudeau used the threat of unilateralism to get what he wanted from 9 of 10.

That is what the coalition has accomplished. Or, so the government has said. We will see.

And then we have our most recent reference case on succession. The Court was very clear about a lot of things - but one of the areas where it was particularly focused was on the role that conventions play in our system. They change over time, based on the attitudes of our nation. In responding to the question - do conventions matter, the court said (and I am paraphrasing) they represent an important element of our law that is not codified. There are very important conventions on BOTH sides of this debate.

If you think Steve was hard to work with before when he was pretending he had a majority, wait until you see him in action when he has one. I admit, the atmosphere in Ottawa is poisoned as a result of the economic update. But, what would it have been like with serious moral questions about the legitimacy of the government from outside the beltway? I have spoken to very few people (real people, on the street) who think this was a good idea. I guess political leadership for me is understanding what the people want - and leading them to it.

Frankly, I am not so arrogant to ascribe intent to a vote. I know why I voted in the last election - and it had nothing to do with this. It won't change my vote - hell, we might even pick up a few along the way if we do a good job - but it wasn't what I was voting for. I was voting for an MP from Ottawa Centre. I wasn't voting for Prime Minister Dion. I daresay, that is NOT the way most other people voted. In fact, lots of people voted to give the green party $2.00.

I will say it clearly and loudly - I DO NOT BELIEVE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE VOTING FOR WHEN THEY VOTE. According to the court, we have to remain cognizant of that when we look to alter our federation. I agree, people need to learn more. Next time, when they vote, they will know what they are voting for - because Steve is going to tell them what a vote for the Liberals and NDP means. And they are going to believe him.

It is a million times worse in America. Trust me.

Do you honestly believe that a Prime Minister could disallow a provincial statute? Would that maybe drive Danny Williams (C - Almost) bonkers? Or a Quebec Premier? Well, legally, that power exists. Go ahead, try using it.

This isn't about forming a government. This isn't even about contrasting various precedents. This isn't even about what a doofus the Prime Minister has been over the last week. This is about understanding timing and delivery. We have clearly botched delivery from the get go. I don't even want to talk about the "Blair Witch Project" response we saw from Dion last night. Filmed in Osama Bin Laden's cave, no doubt.

If this had happened, the next 18 Months (or five months, depending on whose view of the coalition's real strength you believe) would have been attack after attack on the legitimacy of our Parliamentary Democracy. Led by a man who we know has had disdain for a lot of Canadian institutions. In fact, he wanted to reform them.

And, there wouldn't be a lot of people who could argue against him at the highest level. The coalition's leader is already quitting. The coalition's 2IC (NDP - Toronto Son of Tory) is not likely going to love the successor (L - Stole Christmas, gave it back). The coalition's crutch (BQ - Megatron, leader of the Duccepticons) is already figuring out how to undermine Marois after she gets whupped by Charest (L - Sherbrooke), who might also be looking forward to his next job (Right Hon. C - Sherbrooke, M.P., P.C.).

In other words, there is a lot of baggage with being associated with leading this coalition.

And don't even get me started about what this would mean in Quebec. On the one hand, Parizeau is right and the "disfunctionality" of confederation would be exposed. On the other hand, the same people Harper has been trying to win over will now hate him even more. The BQ will continue to participate in the "never-endum" of instability. Gong. Show.

Under the status quo, its legitimacy remains intact. A lever that existed before, and continues to exist, has been exercised on the advise of the political leadership on behalf of the sovereign. In fact, we have postponed the real question - and there is NOTHING wrong with that. In the interim, we have seen vicious attacks against Quebec, against people who believe in social justice. It is shameful that they are under attack. It speaks to the vile methodology of the Prime Minister. Sadly, it is resonating across the country. They will continue. As long as we aren't the ones attacking Canadians, we are in good shape I think.

When we are cast (pun intended) as those denying democracy, rightly or wrongly, we are going to lose that conversation no matter how correct we are. I get it - because I am a lawyer who understands constitutions and powers. I also know why OJ got off. People are still outraged because they think differently than I do. Their vote, however, is the same as ours.

And democracy is just organized mob rule (that was a double pun.)

Ultimately, we have two months to prove that we deserve to form government. We should take the 2005 Budget still on Ralph's (L - Saskatoon Cowboy) hard drive, dust it off, and present it to Parliament - with some tweaks here and there, of course. We need to demonstrate in clear terms we are ready to govern - not that just that we have the confidence of the House.

In that time, I suspect the sands will shift considerably, starting with the fact that the five month rule will suddenly only be three - assuming a quick transition. Still, the PM would ask the people for support. We would likely be the least popular government in history. And then we would get murdered.

Yes, the bully got his way. Our only option was to kill the bully and ourselves to stop him. That isn't a good idea because it sets the precedent that we have to live with the next time. And it might be us that has to live with it.

Yes, this time has also set a precedent. The PM can weasel out of a losing vote by asking for help from the GG. Until the next time, where the facts are distinguished from this situation. Politically, the PMs inability to gain the confidence of the House will be on HIS shirt, not ours.

Finally, we need to recreate our system to allow a new way to just punch the bully in the nose every so often. Having an established committee system that was permanent and allowed a true check on his power is a start. Maybe go so far as having our executive divorced from our legislature. That is a debate I want to be involved in.

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

So, what do you want to talk about now?

I have yet to speak to a single "real Canadian" who thinks this is a good idea.



I know lots of partisan hacks who love the idea.



I know lots of people who don't understand Parliamentary democracy who think it is a bad idea.



They have more votes than us.

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

She could just say no

As this completely unprecedented, there is a possibility, albeit remote, that the Governor General opt to do “none of the above.”

Constitutionally, her power is not defined. To that end, it is possible that she denies the proposed coalition to form government and refuses to issue the write for election. She could simply refuse to accept Mr. Harper’s resignation. This could create even more instability, but allow for the Government to remain in power given that there is no precedent for a coalition of this nature.

Monday, December 01, 2008

Governor General to Call the Queen!

"Ma'am, it is that charming woman from Quebec on the phone - she says there is trouble in the Colonies."

Seriously, there is no living person who has more experience on issues of constitutionalism than Lizzie.

Her advice could be both sage and remarkably on point.

She does, after all, reign over us.

And, to be fair, I am actually interested in what she has to say on this point.