With or Without Permission Debauchery is Still Debauchery

Debauchery usually has a sexual connotation, but can also be used to describe any overindulgence.  Political debauchery is quickly making its way into our vernacular, as we witness overindulgence in campaign spending, attack ads and ugly divisive rhetoric.

Whether we're watching the impassioned faces of the Tea Partiers in the United States, or listening to the often senseless barbs tossed about in the House of Commons, we can see that these pleasure seekers have found their vice.

Not that there's anything wrong with political passion.  That kind of passion not only fuelled the Civil Rights Movement, the Woman's Rights Movement, implemented child labour laws,et al, but has been responsible for our very democracy.

Political engagement, not war, has created our modern civilization.

But just as debauchery can destroy lives, political debauchery can destroy nations.

The New Drug of Choice - Hyerpartisanship.

I don't think anyone could argue that our politics has become ugly and getting worse.

When someone from one side of the room in the Commons, accuses someone on the other side of something, you rarely get an explanation. Instead they pull out a piece of paper with some quote from a newspaper "proving" that the accuser had once engaged in similar behavior.

Political debate is being reduced to "I know I am, but what are you?"

Recently we have learned that the NDP is being charged with the mishandling of public funds, when they peppered ridings about to hold bi-elections, with Party campaign ads, using their Parliamentary envelopes and letterhead. They also took advantage of free postage, which is only permitted, or at least is supposed to be only permitted, to send notices to constituents.

They have been told that they will have to repay 1.17 million, the amount deemed to be the cost of the inappropriate use of public money.

Instead of paying up, apologizing, and promising not to do it again, they have decided to fight the decision, even if it means delaying summer break.

NDP leader Thomas Mulcair claims that the decision was made in a "Kangaroo Court" and that the other parties are guilty of the same crime.

He's right.

It's hard to look at this "ten percenter", sent out by the Conservatives, and not see it as partisan campaigning.

However, the other parties being wrong too is not a defense, it's an excuse.

The abuse of mailing privileges hit a peak in 2009, when it was determined that MPs had spent ten million dollars on what mostly amounted to Party PR. The Conservatives were the biggest spenders at twice what the combined opposition spent, most echoing their campaigns. "Not a leader", "Just visiting", always with a poll asking who was on the right track?

The practice has become less frequent, mainly due to public outrage, but I still receive nonsense suggesting that Justin Trudeau is in over his head or Thomas Mulcair wants to raise taxes.

Mulcair also claims that he received permission for the mailings from the Speaker of the House, who denies he ever approved them.

It does seem highly unlikely, that if the NDP asked if it would be okay to spend more than a million dollars of public money to campaign for upcoming bi-elections, that the Speaker would have said "sure".

So this is not about Kangaroo Courts or secretive House of Commons committees; it's about elected officials, who have become so hyper-partisan, that they see it as OK to use our money to guarantee their Party's political success.

The word debauchery comes from the French word debauchee, which means to “entice from work or duty.” It's pretty clear that duties are being neglected when the lure of oneupmanship and beating the system, take precedence over doing what they were elected to do.

No one campaigns on abusing tax dollars and I doubt they would win if they did.

So How Do We Clean Up This Mess?

Politicians are not the only ones guilty of being hooked on partisan porn. Debates on Twitter and Facebook, some healthy and some not so healthy, often become about defending your own Party's wrong doing, while pointing out the wrong doings of others.

In the last Ontario provincial election, NDP leader Andrea Horvath, constantly referred to the Liberals as "corrupt", claiming that only she could clean up government.

A ridiculous statement. At one time or another, most, if not all, governments, have had at least one member, who bends or breaks the rules.

To really clean up government, we need to clean up politicians who look for ways to abuse the trust we place in them.

Of Top 50 Tax Money Abusers, 47 Were Conservatives

Reports are circulating about this government's abuse of tax money, and one of them is of special interest to me.

These damn ten percenters.

A Chronicle Herald analysis of the expenses shows that 47 of the top 50 spenders on "ten percenters" in 2009-10 were Conservative MPs. Ten percenters
are political mail outs paid for by the House of Commons. The secretive all-party board of internal economy decided this spring to stop MPs from sending mailouts to other ridings.

The practice, which was mostly used by Conservative MPs, drew complaints from voters and opposition MPs because most of the mailings were aimed at attacking opposition MPs over such issues as the gun registry

Gordon O'Connor tried to defend this abuse by saying that his MPs used the program to get their political message out. "We were organized and what we tried to do was get the government message out into the ridings that we didn’t hold" ....

"The government message"?

I live in the Liberal riding of peter Milliken and I've received 13 of these so-called messages this year. They included one quoting Michael Ignatieff in 1991 saying that the government might have to raise taxes to fight the deficit. Another reminded me that Ignatieff once referred to himself as a Samurai Warrior. Several were reminders that ignatieff was "Just visiting".

And those not attacking the Liberal leader, included one promising that the Conservatives were committed to making our plane travel more comfortable (extra peanuts?) and that they were going to protect our cars from theft (clubs designed after John Baird's mouth?)

This was not government messaging, it was Conservative Party propaganda. Nothing more, nothing less. And we paid for it.

Holy Crap. I've Never Seen Such Convoluted Nonsense in My Life. Thank You Tim Uppal

There has been a growing concern and anger over the abuse of mail outs, especially ten percenters by Members of Parliament.

I don't know if this was a problem before the Reform-Conservatives took power or not, but I had never received any before this year.

I live in the Liberal riding of Peter Milliken and he certainly never sent out any of this nonsense.

However, since the Conservatives are targeting this riding for Brian Abrams, I've had nine; each one more ridiculous than the last.

However, I must admit that this one by MP Tim Uppal takes the cake. It wasn't sent to me but a blogger in his riding, who claims to be getting these things on a weekly basis.

A Karl Rove tactic is to use key words. Things that will grab the attention of the reader and plant seeds of ideas. Also name association goes along with that. I remember another one with a question that went something like 'Do you support a Michael Ignatieff coalition with the NDP and Separatists'. Aligning 'Ignatieff' with 'coalition' and 'separatists', was more important than any answer to the question.

Logically the question should have referred to Ignatieff/Layon/Duceppe or Liberal/NDP/Bloc. But these aren't about logic.

If the Party was paying for this I wouldn't care what they asked. They go in the recycle bin anyway. But taxpayers are footing the bill for these, and it's got to stop.

And since I helped to pay for this one, I'm allowed to critique my purchase.

Full size for the face of this is here.

Right off the bat, I have issue with the headline 'Separatists Want to Legalize Euthanasia'. Why is this a separatist issue? Is there some kind of suggestion that they are trying to kill off the rest of us? As silly as that sounds, you have to wonder. Remember the old Reformers back in the day were involved with APEC, and harboured some animosity toward Quebec.

It's called playing to your base.

It certainly worked during the Parliamentary crisis of 2008, when Harper pulled out the 'separatist' nonsense to save his job.

The rest just provides the reader with the feelings of Mr. Uppal toward the issue, and though he had a misprint calling it Bill C-484 and not C-384, it was no big deal. He also asks his constituents whether or not he should support the bill. Fair enough. However, it's pretty clear that he had already made up his mind.

Then we go to the back, the full size of which is here.

WOW!

1. Do you believe all life is sacred and should be cherished?

It would be pretty hard to answer no to that, though I suppose if this was a question about the death penalty, some people might feel inclined to answer 'no'. Kind of a silly question, but I'll bite and answer 'yes'.

2. Do you agree that it is not the government's place to support ending life?

Very leading question. On the front he asked for input, but he's clearly providing the answer here. However, since the government can send us to war, and former General Rick Hillier claimed it was our military's job to "kill people" I'm not sure what he's looking for.

Although support ending life could also be an abortion issue, so I suppose I'll have to abstain.

3. Should a physician be forced to perform procedures against his belief?

Again, this sounds more like the abortion debate. Maurice Vellacott has used this approach, as have several others. I briefly read through the bill, and could not find anywhere suggesting that physicians would be forced to euthanize. It only stipulates that a physician must perform the procedure, meaning not your mailman. I also take issue with the use of 'his' when referring to the doctor. SB 'his' or 'her'.

That might sound picky but if we're planting seeds here ....

4. Is the government within it's rights to stop someone from committing suicide?

Boy, you're putting quite a burden on the government. Anyone is within their rights and duty bound to stop a suicide. We don't expect our government to run around policing everyone. But we're discussing euthanasia for terminally ill patients who are in severe pain.

I thought it was quite noble of Steven Fletcher to write an op-ed piece on the subject, and he brought up some very valid points. As someone who was on the brink of death, he knows what the tipping point can be. He abstained from the vote.

And yes life should always be the first choice, but if you've ever seen the suffering of a cancer patient, prolonging their life is often just cruel and selfish.

A topic this important cannot be thrown together on a mail out and expect a valid response. This was clearly just another Karl Rove push poll, aimed to score points, and not seek opinion.

In defense of Mr. Uppal, I have been keeping a record of these, and his is not the worst. I may even put them together in a book. They are not only a waste of our money, but they are an insult to our intelligence.

Staring Anti-Semitism in the Face. Stephen Harper Should be So Ashamed

There was a brief but important piece in the National Post today by Keith Landy, on the horrendous ten per centers distributed by Harper and his Reformers, accusing the Liberal Party of anti-Semitism.

They were vile, disgusting and inhumane.

To call a Jewish leader anti-Semitic was beyond reprehensible, especially one who has been so active in human rights issues. Were they hoping he wouldn't run again? I'm hoping he does.

Why I stayed at Durban 1
National Post
December 03, 2009

Much has been made of late in regards to the Conservative 10-per-center and most specifically the role of the then-Liberal government at Durban 1. According to the handout the Liberals "willingly participated in the overtly anti-Semitic Durban 1."

In August of 2001, I was a delegate to Durban 1 as the then-national-president of Canadian Jewish Congress. Allow me to say what occurred there.

We all were excited by the prospect of Durban 1. It was the early part of the new century, 911 was still nothing more than an emergency phone number and we hoped this international anti-racism conference would sow the seeds for a better world to come. How wrong we turned out to be.

As we came closer to the beginning of this gathering it became increasingly clear that the enemies of Israel were determined to hijack it. Israel was to have attended but the more anti-Semitic activities in and around the Durban site were countenanced the more it became clear that Israel simply could not stay. We too began to wonder if Canada should be there at all. In fact we called for Canada to leave.

However, following a conversation with then-deputy foreign minister of Israel Michael Melchior, we decided otherwise. Rabbi Melchior urged us to remain in Durban to combat the anti-Semitism and hatred that was evident even before the conference began. His reasoning was that since the Oslo accords, Israel had left the international stage, leaving it open for the demonizers to take control. Rabbi Melchior believed that the hate-mongers must be confronted.

In no way can it ever be insinuated that the Canadian government of the day willingly engaged in an anti-Semitic conference. On the contrary, the Canadian delegation --along with representatives from my organization and B'nai Brith Canada -- stared anti-Semitism in the face at Durban 1. By doing so I am convinced we played a significant ameliorating role, and raised the alarm to the rest of the world.

Keith M. Landy, Toronto.

We Need a Tax Revolt on These Ten Percenters. NO MORE!!!!!!!!!!!

Voices are getting louder in protest, and I swear if these damn ten per centers are not stopped immediately I am going to organize a march. We will gather up as many as we can and drop them on Harper's doorstep (or on his head).

The Reformers spent twice as much as all other parties together on this nonsense, and each one is more ridiculous than the last. Michael Ignatieff has called for reform; I call for a complete stop.

Ten million dollars can be put to much better use. Housing for the homeless, food for the hungry, job creation. One way tickets for the Harper government to Lower Soblovia.

Ten percenters: Ground free flyers

LIKE the rest of us, Canada’s MPs have a right to free speech. But they are abusing one free-speech perk other Canadians don’t have — free postage — though the scam of 10-percenters.

MPs’ free mailing privilege is just that — a privilege. Mail to and from them is carried without postal fees. Why? It’s not because Canadians are crying for more campaign propaganda in between campaigns. The purpose is to enable people to contact their representative and to encourage MPs to help and report to constituents. Essentially, it’s a subsidy to support representation and accountability.

But this privilege is being abused by the rising use of "10-percenter flyers" — campaign-style mass mailings written by party central offices, not local MPs, and sent to targeted ridings using the pooled distribution privileges of individual MPs ....

If Stephen Harper held press conferences, or spoke with the media now and then, we might be able to ask him if he thinks this is a good use of more than ten million dollars. But we'll never know what he thinks, because he doesn't talk to us.

IS THIS REALLY CONSERVATIVE? IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?

Jason Kenney Says "It's So Noisy in Here I can Hardly See" But Irwin Cotler Wins

Irwin Cotler wins the point of privilege over the anti-Semitic hate literature distributed by the Reformers in his riding. I don't know how other Jewish-Canadians feel after being racially profiled and stereotyped, but I'm glad for this small gesture.

And further proof that Jason Kenney was dropped on his head a few too many times when he was a child; he claimed that the fog was so thick he couldn't hear. Poor Jason.

Speaker rules flyers may have damaged MP's reputation
By Mike De Souza
Canwest News Service
November 26, 2009

OTTAWA — The Conservatives may have damaged the reputation of Liberal MP Irwin Cotler by sending taxpayer-funded flyers into his Montreal-area riding which suggested the Opposition party was anti-Semitic, Speaker of the House of Commons Peter Milliken ruled Thursday.

"In my view, the end result was a negative effect that spilled over to (Cotler) in a very direct and personal way," said Milliken in his ruling. "Therefore, I must conclude that the member for Mount Royal, on the face of it, has presented a convincing argument that the mailing constitutes interference with his ability to perform his parliamentary functions in that its content is damaging to his reputation and credibility."

Milliken said that any reasonable person who had read the Conservative pamphlet would be confused about Cotler's actual views, opening the door for federal politicians to investigate the matter in a parliamentary committee.

Cotler criticized the pamphlet for targeting regions across the country with significant Jewish populations. He also complained that it suggested that the Liberals had willingly participated in an anti-Semitic conference and were supporting funding for terrorist groups.

"To identify any political party, let alone a Jewish MP, with willingly participating in such an anti-Semitic event is a most loathsome and dangerous accusation that one could make against that party and that member," Cotler said.

"These accusations have already had damaging and prejudicial effects on my reputation and standing in my constituency . . . These were attacks on me as a person, as an MP and as a member of the Jewish community, and on the party to which I am a member."

But Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney said the Conservatives had presented incontrovertible facts in its leaflets to send a message to voters just like any other federal party.

"Sometimes the fog of hypocrisy is so thick in here that people cannot even hear," said Kenney.

"I am simply saying that this is really quite ridiculous. Members opposite are trying to make a capital case out of a conventional political communication, using the same tactics and distribution that they use all the time, even on the same set of issues. Basically, incontrovertible facts are presented that are matters of conventional political debate."

Maurice Vellacott Admits That MPs Have Nothing to do With Ten Percenters

Maurice Vellacott was forced to apologize recently for a ten per center distributed on his behalf to the NDP riding of Peter Stoffer.

However, his explanation provides further argument that this kind of media is not about MPs keeping the public informed, but simply campaign literature sent out by party central.

When Joe Preston was forced to defend one of the horrendous anti-Semitic flyers, he couldn't, simply because he really had no idea where the statements attributed to Michael Ignatieff came from.

Most people know that these are distributed on the MPs behalf by the Conservative party of Canada, usually without their knowledge. I'm sure many of them are as surprised as we are where they end up, or what is in them.

Michael Ignatieff has proposed reforms to the practice, and I think it's a long time coming. They are obviously not used in the manner that they were intended to be used, and the Reformers spent more than 6 million dollars of our money, this year alone, on these useless ads.

Tory apologizes for erroneous flyers but no move to ban them

OTTAWA - A Conservative MP has apologized for misrepresenting an opponent in one of many controversial flyers his party has been mailing - at taxpayers' expense - across the country. The apology came Monday just as a secretive all-party committee was meeting to discuss what, if any, limits should be placed on so-called ten-per centers - one-page flyers that MPs are entitled to mail to households outside their own ridings.

Saskatoon MP Maurice Vellacott apologized "explicitly" and "without reservation" for the flyer sent to New Democrat MP Peter Stoffer's riding about the long gun registry. The flyer asserted that Stoffer had "worked to support the registry" when in fact he has opposed it since its inception 12 years ago .... Vellacott appeared to suggest that the flyer was produced by the Tory party and not by him or his staff, even though it went out under his name."I have received an undertaking from our Conservative resource group that in the future they will proofread more carefully and nuance more appropriately any ten per center mail pieces that are sent out under my name" ...

IS THIS REALLY CONSERVATIVE? IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?

Prominent Jewish Leaders Take Harper to Task Over Anti-Semitic Flyers

If there is anything good that came of the hate literature distributed by the Reformers last week, when they racially profiled and then stereotyped Jewish-Canadians, it's that there may finally be an end to these ten per centers. Or at least a new direction. I've received seven, all from the Ref-Cons, and all absolutely ridiculous.

None address any concerns that rank the highest for Canadians, like health care and poverty. They are just partisan, mind numbing attacks.

However, it would appear that Harper's racial profiling has upset many prominent Jewish leaders (not the first time) and they have sent him a letter demanding that he stops spreading hate. Anti-Semitism is a real problem in our society, and it's encouraging to learn that incidents are actually on the decline.

But judging by the comments after on-line newpaper articles on the subject, something like this could make it rear it's ugly head. The Globe and Mail had to dispense with comments because they were becoming so visceral.

Jewish leaders ask Harper to trash Tory flyer
Canadian community members disturbed by mailing they say paints the Liberals as anti-Semitic Michael Valpy
Globe and Mail
November 23, 2009

Leading members of the Jewish community – many identified as Liberals – have sent a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper asking him to withdraw a taxpayer-funded Conservative flyer that they say portrays the Liberal Party as anti-Semitic.

The letter is signed by academics, lawyers, politicians, a member of the wealthy and influential Bronfman family and at least one high-ranking former civil servant – Robert Rabinovitch, president of the CBC from 1999 to 2007. About two-thirds are Jews.

“We find it highly disturbing that any party or parliamentarian would attempt to use Israel as a wedge to divide the Jewish community and, indeed, Canadians, for partisan gain,” the letter says.

“Support for Israel should not be portrayed as exclusive to one party. The Liberal Party has a history of support for Israel, working co-operatively and effectively with the Canadian-Jewish community and speaking and acting against terrorism.”

More Postings on Reformers Antisemitism:

1. Why we Must Fight Against the New Identification of Anti-Semitism

2. Why is Stephen Harper Profiling and Stereotyping Jewish-Canadians?

3. Frank Dimant is a Disgrace to His People if he Condones Hate Literature

4. I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING SO VILE IN MY LIFE!!!!! STEPHEN HARPER HAS GONE TOO FAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Women Warriors of the Mujahedeen Khalq. Are They Terrorists, a Cult or Both?

Michael Ignatieff Proposes Reforms to Ten Percenters

After the Reform Conservatives hit a new low with the distribution of ten per centers, Michael Ignatieff has proposed necessary reform to the system. This is an absolute abuse of taxpayers money and for a government who claims they have a handle on our economy, the worst offenders are them.

Liberals call for sweeping reforms to stop abuse of MP “ten-percenter” privileges
November 22, 2009

OTTAWA – In a letter to Speaker Peter Milliken today, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff called on the House of Common’s all-party Board of Internal Economy to implement sweeping reforms to curb the abuse of the MP ten-percenter privilege.

“The Harper Conservatives have deliberately abused this privilege for some time,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “But last week they went too far with their ten-percenters by falsely accusing their political opponents of anti-Semitism. This practice has to stop.”

... In his letter, Mr. Ignatieff urged the Speaker of the House and all other parties to agree to the following steps:

1. Ten percenters should be limited to a Member’s own riding;

2. The practice of ten percenter “regroupings” must be abolished; and

3. The name of the leader of the sending member’s party must be included in any Ten Percenter and the leader must explicitly endorse the content of the Product.

You can view the letter here.

MICHAEL IGNATIEFF. THE NEXT PRIME MINISTER. NOW THAT'S MY CANADA!

Reform Conservative Abuse of Our Tax Dollars is no Longer Funny

The video is just a reminder that Canadians can laugh at themselves. It is very funny. But what we can't laugh at is the waste of our money.

Two separate stories jerk us into reality, reminding us that our current government is not fiscally responsible. They have no problem spending money so long as that money can be spent to buy them a majority.

The first one is again about these damn ten percenters. Almost seven million dollars for sheer nonsense. None discuss things that are important to Canadians, like health care, the homeless, poverty ... instead they try to imply that Michael Ignatieff once called himself a Samurai Warrior or that he's 'just visiting'. We see enough of that on television.

Tory MPs assailed over mailing costs

The Conservatives have made free mail expensive. Reports that Tory MPs ran up $6.3-million in costs last year by mailing out so-called “ten-per-centers” to people outside their ridings have opposition MPs calling for new limits on the free-mail privilege.

The pamphlets are a parliamentary perk: MPs have free mailing privileges, called franking, that allow them to send information outside their riding. But onservatives have employed them at twice the rate of other MPs – and used them to take more bare-knuckled political campaigns into opponents' ridings. “They don't need to use our free franking privileges to carpet-bomb Canada with propaganda. It infuriates me,” New Democrat MP Pat Martin said ...

---------------------

The second story dealing with tax abuse is another reminder of the 100 million dollar Ref-Con ad campaign touting the Canada Action Plan. By now most Canadians are aware of it, so we should cancel the ads and start putting the money into health care; an issue that is still number one on the list of Canadian priorities. They could start with the H1N1 crisis which is far from over, no matter what Mrs. Peacock's kindergarten class says.

Feds' $100-million for stimulus ads should be spent on H1N1 clinics, say opposition Tories accuse opposition parties of frightening the public and creating panic by overstating the degree of the

Provincial warnings to the public about closures of H1N1 vaccination clinics and delays in vaccine delivery contradict the federal government's claim about a sea of vaccine on its way to a worried Canadian public.

On the day Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) reiterated to the House of Commons last week that six million vaccine doses had already been distributed and two million more would be arriving this week, the province of New Brunswick listed more than 50 clinics it was postponing because of vaccine supply problems ....

IS THIS REALLY CONSERVATIVE? IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?

Peter Milliken Just Sent me a Ten Percenter. I'm in Shock!

I just got a ten per center in the mail from Peter Milliken, who broke all the rules in sending this to me.

First off. He is my Member of Parliament. These are supposed to come from people who have never been to Kingston or have no idea what our concerns are.

Calgary MP Rob Anders knows the rules. He's sent me two so far. Tom Lukiwski from Saskatchewan, Mike Wallace from Burlington, Blake Richards from Alberta, and Rob Clarke from whatever hole he crawled out of; have also helped to fill up my recycle bin.

But can you imagine the nerve of a Member of Parliament, and the Speaker of the House no less, sending this to his own constituents? Shocking!

And what a load of propaganda. The Reformers know what to put in a ten per center. Silly polls with arrows pointing to Stephen Harper, grammatical errors, informing me that Michael Ignatieff may have once thought of himself as a Samurai Warrior; that he was "just visiting" or would raise our taxes.

How can you even call this an abuse of tax payer money?

Instead, Mr. Milliken is telling me about the Home Renovation Tax Credit, the Children's Fitness Credit and provides information on H1N1. He also devotes a complete page to Veteran's week, and promotes 'fringe groups' like the volunteers of HMCS Cataraqui, the Burmese Star Association and tries to get me to go to a ceremony, honouring the Battle of Britain. And then of course there's the subliminal message about passports, clearly wanting us to leave the country.

This is an outrage!
-------------------
Way to go Peter.

I think what was so shocking, when I first started receiving the ten per centers on behalf of our local Cons candidate Brian Abrams, was the fact that in the 20 years that Peter Milliken has represented this riding; he has never resorted to these tactics. Our current government has shown me what tax abuse looks like.

Ironically, last night while my husband and I were discussing the fact that Harper's Reformers had resorted to blackmail to scrap the Gun Registry, and their general incompetence; there was a knock at the door. Turned out it was someone who actually had the nerve to be canvassing for the Ref-Con Party.

To my credit, I did not turn the hose on him, but was tempted to release the hounds. (Not really hounds, but a Jack Russell and a 100 pound lap dog).

I just said "are you kidding me?" He got the hint.

You Can't Blame Michael Ignatieff For the Sponsorship Scandal so Give it a Rest

I am getting so tired of the Reform-Conservatives falling back on the Sponsorship Scandal every time they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

First off, Michael Ignatieff was out of the country, as you so like to remind us. Secondly, Adscam involved no elected politicians, unlike EVERY SINGLE REFORM CONSERVATIVE SCANDAL!

And furthermore, when it was revealed, Paul Martin himself ordered an investigation.

However, there is something that a lot of people don't know and that is that the stage was set for this scandal by Brian Mulroney. You will find it all in a book On the Take: Crime, Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years, by Stevie Cameron.

All of those agencies were hired by him in some of the most underhanded, under the table, backroom deals ever.

The Reform-Conservatives had better start dealing with their own scandals, because unlike Paul Martin, Harper abuses his authority, hoping they will just get swept under the rug.

He has still not explained why he thought it was OK to forge receipts in the 'In and Out' to claim credits his party wasn't entitled to. Instead he shut down the ethics committee and called a 300 million dollar election. Taxpayers have so far racked up more than $500,000.00 in legal bills because he claims that he's being picked on so is suing us (again). Apparently if you are a Reform-Conservative criminal laws don't apply.

If he gets off this, lets try fabricating a few receipts on our next income tax return and see how far we get.

And how about the Cadman Affair? Patronage Appointments? Nepotism? 56 Million dollars in partisan television ads. 9 million in ten per centers to tell us that Michael Ignatieff may have once called himself a Samurai Warrior. Charging us For Your Fundraisers. Adoption scandal. Jim Flaherty (deserves his own category), John Baird (ditto), Lisa Raitt, Gary Lunn, etc., etc., etc.

So let's drop the old Adscam nonsense and get on with the business of running this country. You cannot explain away your corruption by suggesting that 'well they did it too'. That line is getting old and weak and I'm sick of hearing it.

YOU ARE STEALING FROM US AND IT HAS TO STOP NOW!!!!!!!

On the take: crime, corruption and greed in the Mulroney years
Stevie Cameron
Chapter Nineteen: It Pays To Advertise

André Verret couldn’t believe his eyes. A friend told him that if he sat in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel’s Café de Paris at breakfast any weekday morning, he could watch hotel manager Fernand Roberge hold court at a corner table for a stream of interesting individuals. "Out of pure curiosity," said Verret, a senior public servant who had moved from Ottawa in 1984 to work in the public affairs office at VIA Rail, "I went to have a look. Every morning around 7 or 7:30 people would spend about fifteen minutes with Mr. Roberge, well-known people, lawyers and the like."

Sometimes a dozen people in all would meet with Roberge over coffee, each person or group of two or three taking no more than twenty minutes. "It was really like his office," said Verret, adding that Roberge’s visitors would leave the table "with beautiful; smiles on their faces."Like pilgrims searching for the Holy Grail, hungry contract seekers had a number of choices during the Mulroney years. As we’ve seen, some were comfortable cutting their deals with Roch LaSalle over a power breakfast at Nate’s in Ottawa.

Many Atlantic Canada businessmen found their way up the back staircase above the New Glasgow pizza parlour to try to humour Big Daddy. A few of the more sophisticated would book a table at Le Mas des Oliviers in Montreal to lobby Guy Charbonneau. And some, as André Verret discovered, preferred the Ritz-Carlton Hotel’s Café de Paris. Advising on federal advertising contracts in Quebec was among Roberge’s pleasant duties, according to half a dozen well-connected advertising executives based in Montreal and Toronto.

At least one senior official in the federal government’s Advertising Management Group, the agency set up to handle the government’s advertising, routinely received calls from Roberge—who was at this time a private citizen with no official authority of any kind. (He was later made a senator by Mulroney)During the Mulroney years, Montreal’s advertising and public relations community made the Ritz coffee shop something of a hangout in the mornings. Perhaps they were hoping for the chance of a word with Mulroney, who always stayed at the hotel when he was in town, or maybe they were just making sure they had regular contact with Roberge. "There was a real clique there," said one of the advertising executives.

One of the members was Marcel Côté, a partner in Sécor, who later worked in Mulroney’s office as his communication’s advisor.One morning in March 1985 Verret was just finishing his breakfast when he saw an acquaintance, then a senior manager at a Montreal advertising firm called Publicité Martin, run by Montreal adman Yvon Martin, in an intense conversation with Roberge. A few minutes later the man rose to his feet, shook Roberge’s hand, and left, grinning broadly.

When he saw Verret, he came over. He spoke enthusiastically about landing the VIA Rail advertising account. Verret, who had been at VIA Rail since June 1984, was skeptical. "In that kind of contract there is always a call for a public tender," explained Verret, and as far as he knew when the Martin official spoke to him, that process was still under way. "Six or seven or eight firms were invited to tender, and we always tried in the past to be as fair as possible."

Back at VIA, several other people were just as incredulous as Verret. To begin with, although the company had been in business for fifteen years, Publicité Martin had not made the original list of potential agencies drawn up by VIA’s advertising department because the firm was not considered to be equipped to handle large national accounts, certainly not one as significant as VIA’s. But Mulroney had just fired the old VIA Rail board and appointed a new one packed with cronies and party bagmen. It was a crew that was feeling its oats, and one of the recently arrived board members saw to it that Martin’s firm was added to the short list.

The final forming bidding process began in March 1985, just before Verret encountered his friend at the Ritz. About nine firms were invited to present their pitches over a two-day period to a committee of three new VIA board members, Gary Brazell (sic) from Winnipeg, Paul Norris from Edmonton, and Marc LeFrançois from Quebec City, and five executives from VIA’s advertising and marketing departments, vice-president Michael Kieran, Jim Warrington, Christina Sirsley, Preston Beaumont, and Nicole Alyot.

By the end, three firms had been dropped from the roster, and two of the nine firms needn’t have bothered to show up. One was MacLaren Advertising, the firm that had enjoyed a near-monopoly on advertising under the Liberals; a second was McKim, which was known to have backed Joe Clark’s failed bid to hang onto the Tory leadership the year before. "They were treated like shit by the board members," said a witness to the proceedings. "It was very embarrassing."After the first day of proceedings, the VIA board members and staff went off to dinner at Montreal’s Atlantic Pavilion, courtesy of VIA, and feasted on seafood, everyone trying to guess what was in the minds of their companions concerning the day’s events.

Some members continued the evening’s festivities at the Ritz-Carlton’s bar where they quaffed champagne, again at VIA’s expense, until the small hours of morning. Others retired to their hotel rooms to prepare for day two of the presentations. This would be the day on which Martin would make his presentation, and Paul Norris and Gary Brazell (sic) had already made it clear they were strong supporters of the firm.When Martin’s firm formally made its pitch, it seemed to overwhelm the board members and underwhelm the VIA staffers. "At best it was mediocre," said one staff person who was there. Another former VIA official agreed.

"The pitch was not very good, it was not strong," the official said. "If they had been innovative and understood the problems of VIA they would have done a better job, but they did not do their homework and gave a presentation that was somewhat silly, that was not up to the task. They did not understand what trains are about in Canada, they did not do the research to understand it.

"The next day, a Saturday morning, the eight committee members met at the Queen Elizabeth Hotel for a final review. The board members stated their admiration for Martin’s presentation but agreed that the one done by Cosette Communication-Marketing Publicité had also been excellent. The VIA staffers were of a different view. Kieran vehemently opposed Martin and said so, while his colleagues mouthed perfunctory platitudes about Martin’s pitch and then stated their preferences for some of the other agencies that had competed. After hearing their remarks, Paul Norris looked surprised. "I don’t think we were all at the same party," he commented. Kieran did not give up without a fight.

He was relentless and persisted against the obvious will of the board members. "It was extraordinary that the board would involve itself with such matters," says Kieran today. "It was not illegal, mind you, but it was extraordinary."About two weeks later the official decision was made at VIA’s head office and the committee members were duly notified. There were two winners, Martin and Cossette. Cossette had been high on everyone’s list and it won 50 per cent of the total contract, or $4.5 million.

Known to spend lavish sums on its creative talent, Cossette was to handle VIA’s national advertising—everything outside the Windsor-Quebec City corridor. Now an industry giant, in 1985 Cossette was still a small regional advertising agency, explained one advertising executive, "but it was known to be extremely tight with Roberge." Martin, an outfit that was reputed to place a higher value on its accounting department, was given the corridor and $4.5 million to do the job. Yvon Martin was disappointed with the results; he had hoped to land the entire package. But he didn’t need to worry, especially after the firm went on to win other excellent contracts. To celebrate his good fortune, Martin, who had started the company in his own home and was still the sole owner, bought himself a new $70,000 Jaguar.

Another former VIA employee, a senior manager who was familiar with the contracts, agreed with Verret’s version of events and remembers what happened after the first ad campaign ran. "We did reviews of his [Martin’s] firm: how successful they were with our campaigns. The presentation the agency made to us was the pits. They really ignored VIA. They took the contract for granted. They never assigned the right account executive to it and their ads were shitty." The executive would complain to the VIA manager who deal with Martin and the manager agreed but could say only, "I can’t do anything.

My hands are tied." Martin still has the VIA Rail account, and he has it all: Cossette no longer has half.Footnote 1Cossette was also supposed to get the Air Canada advertising contract, then split evenly between an English firm and a Quebec firm. "My marching orders are that it’s to go to Cossette," said one senior Tory on the board of the PC Canada Fund to a friend. Only the intervention of Air Canada’s president, Claude Taylor, prevented the move. Cameron, pp. 316-320 ( Toronto: McFarlane Walter and Ross, 1994 WPL 971.064)

If Harper Ever Lives in a Glass House - I Want the Shades Kept Closed!

Someone else is just as frustrated as I am over these ridiculous ten per centers that the Reform-Conservatives have been sending out AT OUR EXPENSE!

This one was probably the dumbest of them all. (Mine came from Rob Anders) First off 'Samurai Warriors' are honourable and fearless, and who cares anyway?

'Cosmopolitan', of course. I mean why would be want a Prime Minister who has seen the world and is well read?

But if he called himself 'horribly arrogant', doesn't that mean he's humbled? If someone else calls you 'horribly arrogant', it's a different matter.

But again. Who cares? We are in the middle of an economic crisis and this is how they feel they should be spending our money? I'm getting them on a weekly basis now, on behalf of Brian Abrams, the Ref-Con candidate who can't steal our money yet on his own.

But then the $ 10,000.00 or so it costs for these mail outs is chump change when compared to the 56 million tax dollars they have spent on partisan ads, to tell us how they are spending our money. I just learned that they also took out a full page ad in the New York Times! What the hell?

Why do people in New York care how he wastes our money? Is he now campaigning for the Republicans, suggesting that he is doing a better job than President Obama?

These guys have go to go! I want my country back!

Conservatie MP Shelley Glover Discredits Police and Gauges Taxpayers

The above video is from a constituent of Conservative MP Shelly Glover, a woman who claims that she is on leave from her job as a police officer and actually brags that "We are the only party that has elected police officers."

I think that is horrible. The police should NEVER be politicized. I know it's all part of the Cons so-called "law and order" agenda, which is more about taking power away from judges and filling the private prisons they are negotiating with their American buddies; than anything else.

But I don't ever want to think that any police officer responsible for my safety is politically partisan. It gives the wrong message to Canadians. "Vote for Shelly and you'll never get a speeding ticket". It just raises far too many questions.

And besides, if she's just on leave to serve as an MP for awhile, does that mean she's "just visiting"?

And of course, like her cohorts, she's not above abusing tax dollars to send out junk mail, as her constituent so aptly points out. Shelley go back to Winnipeg where you can be of service. Stop trying to silence dissidents and stop abusing our generosity.

Cops on the hill
Winnipeg Free Press
May 25, 2009

Saint Boniface MP Shelly Glover is going to chair a new Conservative Law Enforcement Officers’ Caucus.

Glover is on leave from the Winnipeg Police Service and is the first female police officer ever elected to parliament. She was elected last October for the first time.

She will chair the new group which counts four members total – Rob Clarke from Saskatchewan and Dave Mackenzie and Rick Norlock from Ontario.

“We are the only party that has elected police officers,” Glover said today.

Clarke is an 18 year veteran of the RCMP in Saskatchewan, Mackenzie was the chief of police in Woodstock, Ont. and Norlock was an officer with the Ontario Provincial Police for 30 years. Glover was with the WPS for almost 19 years in a variety of positions.

She said police officers who have worked on the front lines of the justice system are in a great position to influence the government to make reforms to the system that actually work.

Glover said the group will be a liaison between police officers and the prime ministers’ office and the justice minister, to ensure the voices of people who really know what the situation is like, and what is needed, have their voices heard.

She specifically mentioned the Youth Criminal Justice Act as one area that needs a lot of improvement and would benefit from the knowledge of people who have dealt first hand with kids who break the law.

Admirable but how about attacking the root causes of crime, like poverty, for instance ? Tougher sentences will do nothing because most perpetraters don't believe they will ever get caught.

If you really want to get tough on crime, you could start here.

Or Maybe here.

Or Here.

Or maybe try this.

Or even this.

Still got too much time on your hands? Tackle this one. It's a doozy.