Category Archives: Politics

And then I’d eat the Rich!

If I were the Israelis, not only would I bomb Iran, but I'd do so in such a way as to create as much trouble for China, Russia, Europe and the United States as possible.
If I were the Israelis, not only would I bomb Iran, but I'd do so in such a way as to create as much trouble for China, Russia, Europe and the United States as possible. -- Glenn Reynolds

Glenn Reynolds tries to flail away at the world, showing that if he had the reigns of power he’d work day and night to plunge as much of the world into war as he could, because as a conservative he is also a great Christian thinker.

Could Canadian “Tea Party” folks be far behind?

For those of us who cannot affored to travel to the United States for private health care are left with only one choice, the government’s health care. And when you only have one choice, you really have no choice whatsoever.

Let’s dissect this notion as it presented:

  1. For those of us who cannot afford to travel to the United States for private health care…So, if there was Private health care in Canada you imagine you could afford it?  The last time I checked the cost of a flight into the USA was the gas to cross the border then 99 bucks on southwest to pretty much anywhere.  So minus those 300 or so dollars the rest of the (20 to 30 thousand dollars) are totally in reach?
  2. The Government’s health careChosen by an elected government and easily changed by wide complaint.  When the people (as a majority) are unhappy those folks in Ottawa are fairly quick to react as public opinion really does shape policy.
  3. When you can only have one choice…
    See point one; if someone cannot afford the new special private tier” they are stuck with the public (possibly underfunded due to the Private Clinics stealing funds from the public coffers like they do in the States) system anyway, how is that more “fair”.
Face it; with few exceptions, ensuring that every Canadian has access to the same level of care is at least more equitable than allowing the more affluent to bypass the line.  There’s nothing like a Queue to level the playing field.
Photo Credit to Ivy Dawned

US Politics: Put me in the Nobama camp, I’m done

For failing to pass meaningful Health Care Reform

For campaigning for Joe Lieberman

For supporting the Corporations over the People

For not halting the Iraq Incursion

For not closing Guantanamo

For not meaningfully punishing the Banks and Speculators that nearly destroyed the world economy

For failing to reverse any of the real legal difficulties that the Bush Admin put into place

I say NOBAMA

LET THE RIGHTEOUS DO SOMETHING WRONG

THIS COUNTRY JUST PLAIN SUCKS FOR JUSTICE!
–4God
This comment was posted on an article about the bodies being dug up from the ground around a serial killer’s house:
Posted by 4God
November 03, 2009, 4:43PM

THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND THESE STUPID CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYERS WILL KEEP THIS SICK PERSON ALIVE LONGER THAN HE NEEDS TO BREATHE!

THIS COUNTRY JUST PLAIN SUCKS FOR JUSTICE! IT’S A SYSTEM AND IT DOES NOT WORK TOO GOOD WHEN IT COMES TO PENALIZING THE WRONG, BUT LET THE RIGHTEOUS DO SOMETHING WRONG AND YOU WILL SEE A BIG DIFFERENCE IN TIMING!

I HATE TO SAY THAT ‘MY’ COUNTRY IS GOING DOWNHILL, BUT IT IS AND CAN’T BLAME ANYONE BUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN IT AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION SAYS WHAT …

WE THE PEOPLE AND WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT DOING WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING…PERIOD…SO I SUPPOSE WE WILL SUFFER FOR OUR WRONG DOINGS!

These comments seem to show up all the time when there is something that offends the Churchie peoples.   “If we were in control we’d do something about this abomination”  given what happened to George Tiller, I think I can imagine.  Talk about incontrovertible truth that a flawed secular system is leaps and bounds beyond a theocratic one.   Look at how the “Very Christian” Michelle Malkin talks about Sharia Law:

“Nope. No stampede to get in front of the cameras and condemn the bloody ravages of sharia law.”

It’s not a ringing endorsement of said Theocratic Law, is it?  This same person said of Doctors like George Tiller, however:

“Oh, what a drag it is on abortionists to detect movement and signs of life in a baby who survived attempted murder.”

That’s not at all like calling him a criminal deserving of a death sentence, is it?  Not at all, right?

And There’s  Bill O’reilly:

“In the unresolved problem segment tonight, the investigation continues into the activities of abortionist George Tiller, known as Tiller the Baby Killer

It’s all about blooding up the water for the conservative and the religious.  Blood begats blood and in the blood you will be saved and all that.  Bullshit.

This is a serial killer, who is sick.  Simple and easy.  Murder is difficult if you are sane and death is forever.  However much the religiously deranged want to say otherwise, death is forever and killing for killing isn’t going to resolve the crime it only provides catharsis.  How did this person get away with so many killings?  How did he hid so many bodies in his yard?  These are questions that need answers.

I don’t imagine ubiquitous monitoring is the answer, it certainly didn’t solve street crime in the UK, nor murder.  So I can’t offer a constructive response here.  I can say this, screaming for state-sponsored murder makes this person no better than those screaming for public beheadings in the “medieval” middle east, and I can’t help but think that as a person in the “Enlightened West” we should be “better” than that.

At least try and say what the ruling actually says

When a large media owner tells you that a government regulation is bad, you had better be willing to at least say “you know what, you feel the need to give me a substandard service while maintaining a monopoly handed to you by the very agency you are asking me to speak against.  I think I might not trust your word on this”

I received the following from Bell Canada:

Dear Customer,

Help stop your TV fees from increasing. CTV, Global and the CBC have recently asked the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to significantly increase TV taxes.

The CRTC has been asked to do this by having Bell and the other operators pay more, which would result in higher fees for you.

We don’t think that’s right, you shouldn’t either. So please speak and have your say.

This is what’s happening.

The CRTC has told satellite and cable companies to hand over $100 million a year as of September 1, 2009. These fees are being passed on to you.

This money is passing through something called the Local Programming Improvement Fund (LPIF) – straight to media giants like CTVglobemedia and Canwest Global, straight to the CBC.

No new local programming, no improvement to anything other than the bottom line of broadcasters.

You are now likely paying for this on your TV bill.

You should also know that hot on the heels of that campaign, CTV, Global and the CBC are now lobbying for even more.

Each year, satellite and cable companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars to broadcasters. We contribute to the CRTC’s operating budget. Although to date these fees have not been broken out on monthly bills, you need to know they exist – especially because the TV networks still want more.

If the CRTC gives in to the broadcasters’ latest demand and lets local TV stations charge for their currently free over-the-air local signals, it would more than double the portion of your Bell TV bill going to government fees – and into the bank accounts of the broadcasters, like CTV, Global and the CBC.

In fact, if the CRTC lets broadcasters have their way, then government-imposed fees will be just shy of one billion dollars.

I’ve also seen the ads Rogers has been placing in the stream on various channels; here’s what the CRTC is proposing:

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/2009/r090706.htm

OTTAWA-GATINEAU The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today announced that the Local Programming Improvement Fund will have over $100 million to distribute during the 2009–2010 broadcast year. The fund was created in October 2008 to support local television programming in markets with a population of less than 1 million.

“Canadians have made it abundantly clear that they value local programming,” said Konrad von Finckenstein, Q.C., Chairman of the CRTC. “We have taken steps to ensure that broadcasters, and particularly those in smaller markets, continue to provide Canadians with programming that reflects their needs and interests.”

As a temporary measure for the upcoming broadcast year, cable and satellite companies will contribute 1.5 per cent of their gross broadcasting revenues to the fund, an increase of 0.5 per cent. As a result, the total funds available will rise from $68 million to over $100 million. Television stations in smaller markets will be able to draw on these funds to maintain their spending on local news and other types of local programming. The Commission will consider the appropriate long-term provisions for the Local Programming Improvement Fund at a public hearing to be held this fall.

In addition, the Commission has harmonized its requirements for the broadcast of local programming in English- and French-language markets. Each week, local television stations will have to air a minimum number of hours of programming that is produced locally and that speaks to, and about, the community.

On May 15, the Commission renewed the licences of the major English-language networks for one year. At the same time, the licences of the TVA Group’s conventional television stations were renewed for two years. The specific licence terms and conditions for these stations were made public today.

Developing a new regulatory framework

The Commission today also launched a public proceeding to develop a new regulatory framework for conventional television broadcasters. The proceeding will include a public hearing starting on September 29, 2009, in Gatineau, Que.

“The rapid evolution of the communications industry is forcing everyone to rethink the model for conventional television broadcasters,” said Mr. von Finckenstein. “This fall, we will develop a new framework that will give broadcasting ownership groups the flexibility to adapt to this changing environment.”

“However, in exchange for greater flexibility, we expect broadcasters to make meaningful commitments regarding the production, acquisition and broadcast of high-quality Canadian programming,” added Mr. von Finckenstein.

Through this public proceeding, Canadians are invited to share their views on a number of specific questions related to:

* a proposed model to conduct future licence renewals on the basis of ownership groups rather than categories of television services
* the provision of revenue support for conventional broadcasters, including:
o the terms and conditions of the Local Programming Improvement Fund
o further safeguards to protect the integrity of Canadian broadcasters’ signals, and
o mechanisms for establishing, though negotiation, the fair market value of these signals
* possible models for the transition to digital television, and
* Canadian programming commitments by English-language television broadcasters.

Interested parties may submit their comments by August 10, 2009, by filling out the online form by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, or by fax at 819-994-0218.

Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-406
Broadcasting Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-411
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-409 (Canwest)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-407 (CTV)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-408 (Rogers)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-410 (TVA)

Funnier still is the tagline from Rogers about “More American Programming” (this is the Rogers that brought us HBO Canada after all and gutted the local and charming City TV)

So yeah, the CRTC wants to pay for more locally produced TV (as locally produced TV is dying out in Ontario for sure) and the Cable and Satellite firms are going to charge you more because of it, so they can bring you what, less local TV?  Is that what they are agitating for?  It certainly seems like it.


When you play with guns

Again, not part of a well-regulated militia
Meleanie Hain, the pistol-carrying Lebanon mom who received national attention for taking a loaded gun to her daughter’s soccer game, was shot to death Wednesday night with her husband in an apparent murder-suicide, police said.
Meleanie Hain was thrust into the national spotlight when she took a gun, in plain view and holstered on her hip, to a soccer game Sept. 11, 2008, at Optimist Park in Lebanon.

She was a gun nut and reaped what was sown, a love of violence and death led to well, violence and death. It’s not the fate of every gun toting person, not even the majority.

However; she souoght to bring chaos and danger to a public gathering of children as an indirect consequence faced a down the very item she sought protection with.

I’m not going hunting for it, but doesn’t the statistical likelihood of a family member being shot got up when you have a gun in your house?

I accept that guns are fun to shoot and somewhat necessary for protection, but if the gun makers were not so prolific and guns were not so readily available
would it remain so necessary to have guns in the home?

Ashes to Ashes, dust to dust, one reaps what one sows and a bullet is what she caught.

In Case you missed it

“Asking George W. Bush to accept responsibility for anything is like asking my cat to fetch. Sure, it’s theoretically possible, but any such behavior would stem from motivations unrelated to the asker’s purpose.”

My Cat, Spencer, Loves to play fetch. Thinks it’s the bees knees and plays until I get bored and hide the toy, he’ll run away after it, bring it close but not to me and make me get up and retrieve it. Which is exactly like getting a Bush to admit they are wrong, sure, they will admit they don’t know the first thing about Scanning Bar Codes at stores or running a profitable company, but when it comes to brass tacks, they will leave you hunting down the object of the game and when cornered alternatively hiss at you, scratch you or piss on your bed clothes.

That was a terrible night in Texas; which I and Ted Nugent will not soon forget.