Great line of the day

From Scott, talking about the federal budget. First, Scott reminds us of Flaherty's budget speech:

"the long, tiring, unproductive era of bickering between the provincial and federal governments is over"

Then Scott reviews all the recent bickering:

I wonder if Flaherty really believed what he was saying when he said that now infamous line in his Budget speech. Harper still has not held a First Ministers meeting with the provinces 18 months into his “new government” mandate. Besides the aforementioned Budget squabbles, you also have several provinces objecting to Harper’s proposed piecemeal Senate “reform”. Relations between provinces and the feds were never this bad under any recent Prime Minister that I can think of - not Chretien or Martin, and not even Trudeau or Mulroney in the midst of their constitutional crises.
You’d almost think Harper and the Conservatives were doing this on purpose to try and prove that Canada is ungovernable. They’re doing a fine job of showing that right now, and most of it is of their own doing.

Emphasis mine.

Great post of the day

Television writer Ken Levin on what would have happened if THE SOPRANOS were on a major network:

The finale would be at least two hours.
There would be a one hour clip show hosted by Bob Costas preceding it.
There would be live coverage of the cast party on the network’s local 11:00 news. It would be the lead story even if Hurricane Katrina hit that day.
There would be a little animated promo swooshing across the bottom of the screen after every commercial break of every other prime time show on that network for two weeks. A little gun would shoot a little mobster. The blood would spell out SOPRANOS.
Also, on the bottom of the screen there would be a little countdown clock for a month leading up to the finale.
The cast would be on that network’s late night talk show. If the network didn’t have a late night talk show they would create one just for this purpose.
An online contest would offer prizes if you guessed who would be whacked and when. That way you could watch the final episode and play along at home.
They would spin off Janice. Coming in September: WIDOW WITH CHILDREN.
They would insist that Tony’s mother return despite the fact that the actress who played her has died.
They would NEVER EVER EVER allow an ambiguous ending.
They would want the following changes in the last scene. Meadow should drive a Ford because that’s who is sponsoring. She should have no trouble parallel parking because Fords are easy to parallel park. The restaurant must be TGI Fridays – also a sponsor and much more colorful. The threat should come from a singing waiter wearing a straw hat, suspenders, and hundreds of fun buttons. A secondary threat should be an Arab terrorist with a scar. The Arab should pull his gun. The waiter should point his banjo (which is also a semi-automatic rifle). It looks like Tony, Carmela, and A.J. are done for it. Final commercial break. We come back just as Meadow bursts in the door with an Uzi and blows the bad guys away. Meadow, it seems, has just come from dance class and is wearing nothing but a hot leotards. Tony says, “That’s what I get for going to Fridays on Tuesday.” The family shares a laugh. Meadow sits down. Everyone hugs and declares their love for each other. Carmelo calls out, “Can we get ANOTHER waiter?” They laugh. One more hug. Long fade out, as music swells – Dino’s “Ain’t That a Kick in the Head”. Fade out. Your local news is next.
So if you’re still pissed at David Chase for the way he really ended the series just think of the alternative.

Well, yeah, when you put it that way...

Shorter

Shorter APC reporter Ron Fournier:

The way to be a better reporter is to work at it.

Then and now

In the opinion of Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party, the people of Saskatchewan are just being absurd.
Promise? What promise?
But it's pretty simple, really.
Here's what Harper said then:

• Work to achieve with the provinces permanent changes to the equalization formula which would ensure that non-renewable natural resource revenue is removed from the equalization formula to encourage economic growth. We will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.

Here's what Harper is saying now:

Calvert said he is taking legal action against Ottawa because he feels his province is being singled out and treated unfairly under equalization . . . [because the federal government] capped the amount of funding a province can receive under the program . . . In the House of Commons question period on Wednesday, Harper seemed to mock Calvert's action.
"I think this debate is getting a bit to the level of the absurd. We're being accused of breaking the contract of the Atlantic Accord. Now the premier of Saskatchewan, who has no accord, is going to sue us for breaking his accord. Mr. Speaker, I don't even understand what they are saying anymore," he said.
Calvert responded angrily on CTV's Mike Duffy Live, saying the prime minister "fully understands what I'm saying -- you can be sure of that."
"Here's a prime minister who came from the West. Here's a prime minister who came directly out of that non-renewable resource sector -- the oil patch. Here's a prime minister who made a promise to the people of Saskatchewan, in fact the people across Canada, including our good friends in Atlantic Canada ... knowing full well what this promise means. He knows full well that he has betrayed the promise. He also knows we don't have an accord -- he wouldn't offer us one."
Calvert earlier said the province isn't treating its case as a broken contract. "Our approach will be constitutional," he said.
The Constitution recognizes that resources belong to the province and that equalization is a constitutional provision. Fairness must be a part of any equalization policy change, and Saskatchewan has clearly been singled out, he said.

As I have said before, politicians break promises all the time, for good reasons or bad. And then it's up to the voters at the next election to decide how important it was.
But at least be honest about it.
Harper is simply lying, over and over-- and so are the Saskatchewan Conservative MPs -- when they argue that they "substantially" kept their promise. No, they didn't. How stupid do they think we are?

Odd

Hmmm -- I just think it's a little odd, that's all. The Conservative Party website front page has five (5) photos of Stephane Dion and one (1) photo of Steven Harper.

Dog days

Jason Cherniak writes about Peter MacKay's ironic dilemma:

For all his self-sacrifice, Peter MacKay has been treated by Stephen Harper like a dog. He is allowed to speak when called on in Question Period. He is allowed the treats of foreign travel. But always, always he is at the beck and call of the Prime Minister. This most recent shock of the collar - this one more request to put principle aside - should surely be the final straw. For what good is the "greater good" when it can only lead to the destruction of the Conservative Party in Atlantic Canada and an end to all for which MacKay has worked these long years? . . . It is time for Peter MacKay to make a decision. Is he a man or is he a dog?

Linda McQuaig says Harper is Bush's new 'poddle'

Perhaps the most notable thing Stephen Harper did at the G-8 gathering last week was signal his intention to take over retiring British Prime Minister Tony Blair's role as George W. Bush's most helpful foreign ally.
The implications of this go far beyond whatever embarrassment Canadians may come to feel about our Prime Minister assuming the role of what has sometimes been referred to as Bush's “poodle.”
Members of our corporate and academic elite have long pushed for Canada's Prime Minister to adopt the “poodle” role (without, of course, calling it that), arguing that closer ties with the White House will bring us more influence in U.S. corridors of power.
But as Tony Blair's experience illustrated, the influence tends to go the other way — with the lesser power helping to advance Washington's agenda, rather than Washington advancing the agenda of its finely-furred friend.

Personally, I always thought dogs had more dignity than Conservative politicians, but I could be wrong.

More stupid people

Oops. I forgot to mention these idiots:

. . . the proposal from the Air Force's Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio . . . suggested, "One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior."
The documents show the Air Force lab asked for $7.5 million to develop such a chemical weapon.
"The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a chemical that would cause enemy soldiers to become gay, and to have their units break down because all their soldiers became irresistibly attractive to one another. . . The notion was that a chemical that would probably be pleasant in the human body in low quantities could be identified, and by virtue of either breathing or having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soldiers would become gay," explained Hammond.

Oohhh, getting a bunch of 19-year-old guys to want to have sex, what a breakthrough weapon that would be!.
And becoming gay -- obviously, in their opinion, some kind of fate worse than death.
Because then they wouldn't be allowed to be soldiers anymore
...oh, wait, I guess they forgot that just about the only army in the civilized world that still even CARES whether soldiers are gay is the American army.

Why do people believe such stupid stuff?

What is wrong with these people?

They believe abortion and hormonal contraception is murder . . . banning the most effective forms of contraception will lead to more unwanted pregnancies than ever—and thus to more back alley abortions, if they get their wish and abortion is banned. Women’s lives are at stake here, and there is no more room for compromise with the majority of anti-choicers.

Or these people?

Can you believe we are actually reading stuff like this?

Although many scientists accept evolution as the best theoretical explanation for diversity in forms of life on Earth, the issue of its validity has risen again as an important issue in the current 2008 presidential campaign.

It's enough to make you hang your head in despair.

Or this guy?

With a "strike plan in place," according to U.S. military officers, and 'a neo-conservative international' targeting Iran, Sen. Joe Lieberman lets out "centrist war cries" militating for "aggressive military action" against Iran.

And these guys?

“This is a very serious undertaking,” Mr. Bar-Tur said. “This is not some hokey park that we’re talking about.” . . . The park, described in promotional material as “edutainment,” would cost $150 million to $200 million. With a Galilean village as its centerpiece, one side of the park would present Old Testament stories like the Exodus; the other side would have New Testament stories like Jesus’ birth and crucifixion. The only displays in writing would be excerpts from Scripture, and parts of the park would be reserved for Bible study.

Boy, doesn't that sound like fun, kids?
And Dave has tracked down the Bible Park/Hard Rock Cafe connection. I wonder how many people still believe that Elvis lives?

Bye, Steve

Tens of thousands of people like me loved Steve Gilliard and there is no way we could have attended his funeral on Friday.
There were a few bloggers who did but they seem to think there's something wrong with either
telling us about it or giving us the opportunity to talk together about what Steve meant to us all.
So that's that, I guess.
Maybe someday, somebody will gather his writing up and present it on a blog that advances what he tried to achieve in blogging. He was a pioneer and he knew, better than anyone, how important and valuable was the community he created. Every time there was a post on The News Blog about his illness, his community gathered round and we all tried so hard to send messages of strength and support and caring. It was a remarkable outpouring.
The community is scattered now and has no place to meet anymore. Maybe we'll find each other again someday. In the meantime, bye, Steve.

The end

And from a million homes across North America comes the cry "What the fuck was that all about?

Great line of the day

DBK describes the media frenzy over Paris Hilton:

The news story ... has gripped the nation's consciousness like a rottweiler on a lamb chop...

How's that for a memorable image?

Call the CDC -- its an epidemic

Bush-Exasperation Syndrome

An intensive study of 1,000 randomly-selected Americans has yielded conclusive evidence of a heretofore unnoted contagion, an offshoot of Tourette's Syndrome doctors have labeled BES, or Bush Exasperation Syndrome . . . [which causes] involuntary outbursts of projectile cursing whenever the name or image of President George W. Bush is flashed before sufferers of this malady . . . those stricken with Bush Exasperation Syndrome are more likely to be volatile, unable to control their bodily movements when seized by a fit of cursing, with arms flailing, and digits involuntarily making obscene hand gestures at television screens or other triggering stimuli.
. . . words and phrases widely known to be associated with George W. Bush can increase the severity of these seizures. For instance, the phrase "the decider" has been shown to be nearly fatal to people with advanced cases of the disease, and there have been a handful of documented fatalities attributed to BES patients exposed to the phrase "Is our children learning?"

Good, Bad, Ugly

Good:

The Supreme Court of Canada has overturned a B.C. legislation that effectively tore up union contracts in 2002 and ruled collective bargaining is protected under the Charter of Rights . . . It's the first time the Supreme Court has recognized the right of collective bargaining. It sided with a group of B.C. health unions seeking to overturn Bill 29, the Health and Social Services Delivery Improvement Act, rushed through in January 2002 in just three days by the B.C. Liberal government . . . The Supreme Court justices agreed the B.C. government was facing a dilemma but shot down its lack of consultation with its unions and failure to try less intrusive and heavy-handed ways to find a compromise. The "measures adopted by the government constitute a virtual denial of the (charter) right to a process of good faith bargaining and consultation," the decision said. "The government presented no evidence as to why this particular solution was chosen and why there was no consultation with the unions about the range of options open to it."

Bad:

Two of world's most famous anti-poverty activists [Bono and Bob Geldof] tore into Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Friday, accusing Canada of blocking other G8 nations from making clear targets in the group's humanitarian aid package to Africa. . . The high-profile activist-musicians cited sources inside the summit who alleged Harper personally blocked the G8 leaders from accepting accountability for fulfilling their promises. "It's as if we have the place bugged, because everybody tells us," Bono said.

Ugly:

245. Detainees were taken to their cells by strong people who wore black outfits, masks that covered their whole faces, and dark visors over their eyes. Clothes were cut up and torn off; many detainees were then kept naked for several weeks.. . .
247. Detainees went through months of solitary confinement and extreme sensory deprivation in cramped cells, shackled and handcuffed at all times.
248. Detainees were given old, black blankets that were too small to lie upon at the same time as attempting to cover oneself.. . .
252. A common feature for many detainees was the four-month isolation regime. During this period of over 120 days, absolutely no human contact was granted with anyone but masked, silent guards. . . .
256. Detainees were exposed at times to over-heating in the cell; at other times drafts of freezing breeze.. . .
266. There was a shackling ring in the wall of the cell, about half a metre up off the floor. Detainees’ hands and feet were clamped in handcuffs and leg irons. Bodies were regularly forced into contorted shapes and chained to this ring for long, painful periods. . . .

How stupid do they think we are?

I don't care how they try to parse and triangulate and rephrase and reinterpret. They broke their promise to Saskatchewan. And now they don't even have the integrity to tell the truth about what they are doing:

During the last election, the Conservative platform stated that non-renewable resource revenues would be excluded from the federal-provincial equalization formula. However, the spring budget didn't include such a commitment.
"Those who voted for the Conservatives in Saskatchewan and Atlantic Canada put their trust in the commitments made by Mr. Harper," Dion said.
"That trust was broken."

OK, sometimes politicians break their promises, for good reasons or bad.
But after all of Harper's talk-talk-talk about accountability, I would have expected him and his Saskatchewan Conservatives to at least have the guts to admit what they have done.
Harper and the Conservatives keep lying about it, over and over.

Great line of the day

From Accidental Deliberations

Shorter Peter MacKay:
I would never have said our party is willing to tolerate MPs voting their conscience if I'd thought one of our members still had one.