The Canadian Manifesto 9: Retribution and the Bottom Line

William Wilberforce (1759-1833) was a British politician, best known for his work to abolish the slave trade. He helped to pass legislation that imposed fines of £100 on shipowners, for each slave found on board.

It backfired, because when these men saw authorities approaching, they simply threw the slaves overboard.

However, he is said to have been a hero of Abraham Lincoln's, and instrumental in putting an end to slavery in both the United States and across the pond.

Wilberforce is now a favourite of the American Religious Right for several reasons. One being the fact that he was a conservative, the second that he had devoted his life to prayer, and of course the whole anti-slavery thing suggesting that prayer and conservatism are positive influences on society.

However, much of the success of this New Right movement, has been based on their ability to rewrite history.

Wilberforce was involved in the anti-slave movement, but not because of his Christian charity, but rather that it was politically expedient. Prime Minister William Pitt was under a lot of pressure by the abolitionists, and needed a cover.

Interestingly imperialism’s ‘great saviour and hero’ Wilberforce was not amongst the original grouping. Nor did he end up joining the society of his own volition or as a matter of conscience. Instead he was ‘recruited’ and sent into the abolition movement by the then Prime Minister William Pitt. The fake cover story about his moral and religious conviction compelling him to work for the abolition of slavery was made up later. (1)

In fact, in 2010 the historian Stephen Tomkins discovered documents that suggested Wilberforce actually permitted the buying and selling of slaves, despite new regulations he helped to pass.

"After abolition, the British navy patrolled the Atlantic seizing slave ships. The crew were arrested, but what to do with the African captives? With the knowledge and consent of Wilberforce and friends, they were taken to Sierra Leone and put to slave labour in Freetown." (2)

Wilberforce really had little to do with the end of slavery in the British colonies. Most slaves freed themselves in a series of revolts.

However, there is another reason why the Republicans like Wilberforce so much. He was one of them, profiting off the misfortune of others. The Wilberforce family made their money in the wool and cotton business, so raising the possibility of slavery coming to an end, drove up the price of their commodities. (3)

Today he would be a Wall Street banker.

Chuck Colson: From Watergate to "Faith Based" Justice

Charles "Chuck" Colson, was a former member of the Nixon Administration, and one of the "plumbers" of the Watergate break-in.  For his role in the crime, he was sent to prison, serving just seven months.  For a man who had earned the reputation as Nixon's "hatchet man", and was known to keep "enemy lists" as a Washington power broker, this was a devastating blow.

Not only was he pushed out of the inner circle, but he was reduced to playing the role of a common criminal.

The story goes that a corporate buddy of his gave him a copy of C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity, and after reading it, Colson gave his life over to Jesus.  The media was not convinced, seeing it as a ploy to garner a lighter sentence.

I'll tell you his story and you can be the judge.

Using William Wilberforce as his guiding light, Colson created the Wilberforce Forum, a conservative Christian think tank, promoting the teaching of Intelligent Design (Creationism as opposed to Evolution), and established the Evangelical Prison Fellowship, to "save" his fellow man.  Or so we are told.

Please read on.

Stephen Harper and Corrections Corporation of America

After taking an interest in the Save the Prison Farm movement, I began to attend lectures and information seminars, dealing with the rise of corporate, for-profit prisons.  There is a consensus that the Harper government's new "law and order" strategy is geared toward the privatization of our prison system.

The way it works is that taxpayers fund the construction and/or expansion of jails and penitentiaries, which when completed, are then turned over to the corporate sector to operate. The government grants them so much for each prisoner they incarcerate on our behalf.

One name that comes up regularly, is the Corrections Corporation of America, the largest stakeholder in the business of Penance for Profit.

In 2007, Craig Jones of the John Howard Society, said in an interview, that he feared that Stephen Harper was moving in that direction.  He had hired Robert Sampson, former correctional minister under Mike Harris in Ontario, who opened the door to the privatization of the province's jails.  The experiment was a disaster.  His Penetanguishene "super jail" was closed after revelations of flawed security, inadequate prisoner health care, and higher reoffending rates. (4)

And the money taxpayers were supposed to save?  It cost us $80 million to build and the promised jobs were all low paying, minimum wage, that did nothing to "pay for itself", from accelerated income tax revenue. (5)

But this won't stop Stephen Harper.  Once he makes a decision, he sticks with it, come hell or high water.  He was elected to promote corporate interests and corporate interests he will promote, especially if they are  those of American corporations.

But let's take a closer look at Corrections Corporation of America, to decide whether or not we want to replicate their business here.

In June of 2000, Ken Silverstein wrote in Prison Legal News. 

What is the most profitable industry in America? Weapons, oil and computer technology all offer high rates of return, but there is probably no sector of the economy so abloom with money as the privately run prison industry.

Consider the growth of the Corrections Corporation of America, the industry leader whose stock price has climbed from $8 a share in 1992 to about $30 today and whose revenue rose by 81 per cent in 1995 alone. Investors in Wackenhut Corrections Corp. have enjoyed an average return of 18 per cent during the past five years and the company is rated by Forbes as one of the top 200 small businesses in the country. At Esmor, another big private prison contractor, revenues have soared from $4.6 million in 1990 to more than $25 million in 1995. (6)

And what of the product they are offering?

Roughly half of the industry is controlled by the Nashville-based Corrections Corporation of America, which runs 46 penal institutions in 11 states. It took ten years for the company to reach 10,000 beds; it is now growing by that same number every year ....

To be profitable, private prison firms must ensure that prisons are not only built but also filled. Industry experts say a 90-95 per cent capacity rate is needed to guarantee the hefty rates of return needed to lure investors. Prudential Securities issued a wildly bullish report on CCA a few years ago but cautioned, "It takes time to bring inmate population levels up to where they cover costs. Low occupancy is a drag on profits." Still, said the report, company earnings would be strong if CCA succeeded in ramp(ing) up population levels in its new facilities at an acceptable rate". (6)

This explains the Harper government's horrendous crime bills, that will put people behind bars for the slightest of offenses, and keep them there.    According to the ACLU's National Prison Project:  "Private prison companies have also begun to push, even if discreetly, for the type of get-tough policies needed to ensure their continued growth. All the major firms in the field have hired big-time lobbyists."

Crime and punishment is no longer decided by criminologists or the justice system, but by corporate lobbyists, who in the United States are now also pushing for "chain gangs".  According to Rev. Edward Pinkney in Michigan:  "In many states there is a move to remove gov. administration of prisons and privatize them for corporate profit. The labor of the prisoners belongs to the state but when the state transfers their interest to a private corporation, the labor of prisoners belong to the corporation. A corporation will run the lives of prisoners and decide how they shall labor and what they shall labor at. Do you see chances for profit here?" (7)

Kind of puts Tim Hudak's meanderings into perspective, doesn't it?

Several videos reveal the way that these private prisons operate.  Many are now being investigated for promoting criminal activity behind bars, inadequate health care, high reoffending rates, and lax security.

Fight- Corrections Corporation of America

Sex abuse

Privatization of Punishment

Exposed Prison Big Business

Oh But it Gets Worse.  Back to Chuck Colson

Conditions in these prisons are deplorable, but a new scheme appears to be making an attempt to change that.  Prison Fellowship, started and run by Chuck Colson, advocates for prisoners and their families, with a faith-based alternative.

One experiment in Unit E at the state prison outside Newton, Iowa; gives a country club feel to a facility notorious for horrendous living conditions.

The cells in Unit E had real wooden doors and doorknobs, with locks.  More books and computers were available, and inmates were kept busy with classes, chores, music practice and discussions.  There were occasional movies and events with live bands and real-world food, like pizza or sandwiches from Subway.  Best of all, there were opportunities to see loved ones in an environment quieter and more intimate than the typical visiting rooms. (8)

They even have private baths with porcelain sinks.  Just like home.

But there's a catch.  You have to be "saved".

... the only way an inmate could qualify for this kinder mutation of prison life was to enter an intensely religious rehabilitation program and satisfy the evangelical Christians running it that he was making acceptable spiritual progress. The program — which grew from a project started in 1997 at a Texas prison with the support of George W. Bush, who was governor at the time — says on its Web site that it seeks "to ‘cure’ prisoners by identifying sin as the root of their problems" and showing inmates "how God can heal them permanently, if they turn from their sinful past." (8)

And before you light the lamps and sing Hallelujah, the program appears to be just another way to get taxpayers to pad the pockets of the corporate sector, and the Corrections Corporation of America is ready to elevate Colson to sainthood.

... the Corrections Corporation of America, the nation’s largest prison management company, with 65 facilities and 71,000 inmates under its control, is substantially expanding its religion-based curriculum and now has 22 institutions offering residential programs similar to the one in Iowa. And the federal Bureau of Prisons, which runs at least five multifaith programs at its facilities, is preparing to seek bids for a single-faith prison program as well. (8)

What was revealed in these prison programs, was just another abuse of taxpayers money.  Using government grants to establish the InnerChange, Prison Fellowship was sued by Iowa taxpayers and inmates.

In ruling on that case, Judge Pratt noted that the born-again Christian staff was the sole judge of an inmate’s spiritual transformation. If an inmate did not join in the religious activities that were part of his "treatment," the staff could write up disciplinary reports, generating demerits the inmate’s parole board might see. Or they could expel the inmate.

And while the program was supposedly open to all, in practice its content was "a substantial disincentive" for inmates of other faiths to join, the judge noted. Although the ministry itself does not condone hostility toward Catholics, Roman Catholic inmates heard their faith criticized by staff members and volunteers from local evangelical churches, the judge found. And Jews and Muslims in the program would have been required to participate in Christian worship services even if that deeply offended their own religious beliefs. (8)

These religious organizations, operate with little or no scrutiny, despite the fact that they received hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money.

And What Does This Have to Do With Us?

Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship has gone international, and though operating in Canada for several years, it would appear that their activities are being accelerated.  News from Offenders Aid and Rehabilitation Services (OARS) in South Australia:

Local media has been covering the proposal by Prison Fellowship SA to develop an overtly Christian wing in one of the South Australia prisons.   Whilst this may seem a good idea on the surface of it, OARS SA is not generally supportive of this notion.   Prison Fellowship International has been advocating this approach for many years and a number of such services have been implemented in the United States and Canada.  The evidence about the success of this approach is not strong, and some Governments appear to have used Churches and or their associated NGO's to fund services that should rightly be funded by themselves.   In advocating for such a prison wing in Canada recently, Prison Fellowship Canada, among other things, suggested that "We would not require someone to be a professing Christian to enter but we certainly would expect them to be respecting the values and principles that we would be engaged in." 

This underscores the essential dilemma for me.   It is the clear experience of OARS SA that one needs to be very careful about offering redemption to people who are incarcerated and have very few alternatives or hope.  It can be be potentially very damaging in the long term, and it is possible that false conversions happen simply to get some support.   Another potentially negative factor is the damage caused when an elite or special wing is structured in any prison that provides opportunities not available to everyone. (9)

When the Harper government closed the Prison Farms, they claimed that they had other rehabilitation programs in mind.  Is this what they meant?

In Canada, Prison Fellowship does a lot of good work, but they can't be an alternative to time tested rehabilitation programs.  And they should only be one of several other initiatives.

During the last election campaign, the Conservatives focused on Human Trafficking, even suggesting that Michael Ignatieff was in favour of the horrendous practice.  However, what Ignatieff was opposed to was the part of the bill allowing those 'rescued" to be incarcerated for up to a year, including women and children.

Researching private prisons and Chuck Colson, I discovered that even immigrant detention centres are going corporate.   Immigrants for sale, while reports of wholesale abuse, sexual and physical, in these facilities are on the rise.

And Corrections Corporation of America run several of them. 

All part of the Prison Industrial Complex.

So is Chuck Colson a saint or a sinner?  He has certainly wormed his way back into the halls of power.

Some have compared him to Francis Schaeffer, the unwitting architect of the Religious Right, but Schaeffer's son disagrees.  He says that Colson is nothing like his father, and is just another opportunist cashing in on religion.

We have to remember that everything Stephen Harper does is motivated by the profit margin, for those who have put him in power.  (He still refuses to tell us who financed his leadership bid to take over the Alliance Party, Now the CPC)  And the majority of his policies are not only motivated by Republican policies, but many are also written in the USA.

It shouldn't be this hard for the Canadian media to keep us informed.  Why do I  have to let my fingers travel around the world, just to try and figure out what Stephen Harper and his Christian Right is up to?

The crime of media silence.  Is there a corporate run detention centre for those guys?

Sources:

1. The Story of the Caribbean People, By James Ferguson, Randle Publishers, 1998, ISBN-10: 976812377X, p. 132

2. William Wilberforce was complicit in slavery, Stephen Tomkins, The UK Guardian, August 3, 2010

3, Will the Real William Wilberforce Please Stand Up, Pan-Afrikan Society of London South Bank University, 2007

4. Stephen Harper opens door to prison privatization, By Alex Roslin, Straight Goods, November 22, 2007

5. Experiment in private prison, Penetanguishene, By Mirko Petricevic, Kitchener Waterloo Record, September, 13, 2000

6. US: America's Private Gulag, by Ken Silverstein, Prison Legal News, June 1st, 2000

7. For profit chain gangs in Michigan? Michigan Welfare Rights Organization, December 17, 2008

8. In God's Name: Religion for Captive Audience, with taxpayers Footing the Bill, By Diana B. Henriques and Andrew Lehren, New York Times, December 10, 2006

9. OARS SA, CEO Blog, December 16, 2009

Will Rob Ford Put an End to Blissful Ignorance?

On February 15, 1983, the New York Times ran a headline: Reagan Misstatements Getting Less Attention.

Ronald Reagan was not only the first American President to bring the Religious Right into his administration, but he also launched an era of stupid in politics.

The man dubbed "The Great Communicator" could barely string two coherent sentences together, and after spending three years trying to make some sense of his ramblings, the media had clearly given up.

I have to laugh at how the Right have now canonized him, but during his tenure he was never that popular. I think his highest polling was right after he was shot.

Unfortunately "idiots" is now a term often used to describe the Republicans, as they've capitalized on incomprehension, and it hasn't hurt them one bit.

Their esoteric boys club has learned that there is a fortune to be made in the mining of ignorance.

Glenn Beck is not a moron, he just played one on TV.

When Stephen Harper's Reform Party had its first real political success in 1993, we were shell shocked with their constant firing of racial slurs and half witticisms.  The Toronto Sun called them "a bunch of dung kicking rednecks".  Now the Sun is among their strongest supporters, pitching the dung they once hoped to duck.

And they have cleverly made the reaction to stupidity, the story, instead of the actual stupidity.

Sun TV often runs a banner reading "We're on your side".  Those "leftist elitist pinkos" don't understand you, but we do.  Then they run to their own elitist friends and say "watch the puppets dance".  Both groups come away with a feeling of superiority.

Neoconservatism 101.

Which brings us to Toronto mayor Rob Ford.  When he first appeared on the scene he created quite a sensation.  Acting as though he would be more comfortable in Animal House than City Hall, he became the favourite of Canadian conservatives.  The more we "lefties" sounded the alarm, the more popular he was.

From Jim Flaherty to Tim Hudak, they couldn't wait to have their photo taken with this new iconic symbol of absurdity.  Stephen Harper touted him around the campaign trail, and the two are now BFFs.

However, they may have a problem.

It would appear that Torontonians have awakened to the fact that there is a reason why you don't elect someone like Rob Ford to run the largest city in Canada.  His foolishness was not an act.  He's really a fool.

According to Royson James in the Star:

His political honeymoon long over, Toronto Mayor Rob Ford has lost the public’s confidence. And now, he’s about to lose council’s as well.  The Ford revolution may be aborted before it takes root.

Torontonians are not impressed with Ford’s confrontational style, his lone-wolf approach to leadership and his threats to gut city services after guaranteeing during the election that he’d cut the “gravy” and not cut a single service.

His poll numbers are slipping fast, and in the middle of a provincial election, where Toronto is key, will this hurt Tim Hudak?  Memories of Mike Harris's slash and burn policies, and broken promises, are already proving to be a hindrance. 

And Hudak has been playing the stupid card with his "chain gang" musings and attacks on "foreigners".

If you've been following the Republican debates, you would have to think that they have finally hit bottom.  Cheers when contender Rick Perry stated with pride, the number of people he sent to death, and refrains of "let him die", when a scenario was presented to Ron Paul of a young man in a coma with no health insurance.

Has Canada's new conservative movement finally hit bottom with Ford?

I'd like to think so, but I'm not so sure.  There is now an arrogance in the ignorance that is driving this movement.  They could never handle bliss.  They're just too damned angry. An anger fuelled by the New Right.

"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."  Saul Bellow (Canadian-born writer and winner of both the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes) 

First We Take New Jersey ... Then On-tar-i-o! Tim Hudak's New Theme Song?

Martin Regg Cohn had an excellent column in the Star on Monday: Hudak’s taking Ontarians for a ride.

In it he questions the logistics of the Ontario Conservative's Changebook Platform. I perused that and it reminded me of another questionable platform. That of Mike Harris's Common Sense Revolution.

For Ontarians with short memories or those not biting their nails to the quick and developing a nervous tremor at the mention of Mike Harris, maybe it's time for a little history lesson.

I don't need to tell you the damage that Harris did to this province, so will instead lay the foundation for the 1995 manifesto, that made no more sense, than the 2011 redux.

So grab a coffee and pull up a chair.

The 'Long' and the Short of it

One of the engineers of Ontario's so-called Common Sense Revolution, was Tom Long, former president of the Ontario Conservative party.  Long had worked on the campaign of Ronald Reagan and returned to his home and native land, to practice his recently acquired neoconservative skills.

His first big campaign was that of Kim Campbell.  If you're asking yourself Kim who (?), she took over the party leadership of the federal PCs, after Brian Mulroney stepped down, and led them to their disastrous showing in 1993, when they were reduced to two seats and lost official party status. (Soon to be gobbled up by the Reform-Alliance)

With the help of several Tory staffers, including John Baird, who was then working for the Campbell government, Long created several personal attacks on Jean Chrétien, including one making fun of his face (the result of Bell's Palsy), that turned the nation off.

Undaunted, Long then turned his attention to Ontario, while Baird went to work as a lobbyist.

Meanwhile Back in New Jersey

Then governor of New Jersey, Jim Florio, was reeling from a report, revealing that his state contained  five of the ten poorest cities in the United States, while also the home to some of the country's wealthiest citizens.

Access to education was considered to be one of the stumbling blocks for the poor, prompting a Supreme Court judgement, demanding that Florio raise billions in revenue to turn this around.

So he raised the income tax rate on the wealthiest and all hell broke loose.

His future Republican opponent, Christine Todd Whitman, helped to create Republicans for Responsible Government, organizing mass protests against this "Tax and Spend" Democrat.  One of their slogans.  How original.

Whitman, a former classmate of neocon guru, Steve Forbes (he handpicked her to run as Governor), then challenged Florio, running on a platform of "Common Sense".

Meanwhile Back in Ontario

Whitman's platform was drafted by Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, a friend of Tom Long's.  With wounds licked clean from the Campbell trouncing, he visited Murphy to discuss a new strategy for the next provincial election.

Soon after, the National Citizens Coalition, created Ontarians for Responsible Government, a carbon copy of Whitman's 'advocacy for the rich' group.  While Campbell's defeat was devastating for Long, the NCC were actually rejoicing.  They had spent $50,000 on the successful campaign of a newly minted Reform Party MP, who they knew would work for corporate interests.

His name:  Stephen Joseph Harper.

So while OFRG poured $560,000 into attack ads on NDP Premier Bob Rae, the "Whiz Kids" (including Tony Clement and Guy Giorno), also known as the "cut and paste" crew, copied Whitman's platform, which was highlighted by a promised 30% reduction in income tax rates.

In the 1996 Fall edition of Canadian Dimension, there was a piece by Jason Ziedenberg, entitled First, we'll take New Jersey: The real roots of common sense.  In it he says: 

In November, 1993, Tom Long, the former president of the Ontario Tories and manager of the last federal PC's campaign, went down to New Jersey to find out if the first shots in America's Republican revolution could echo up here  ... After organizing Kim Campbell's disastrous campaign, Long needed a good idea to redeem his name as political king-maker. What Long found in New Jersey wasn't a good idea; but he did find the raison d'etre for Canadian neoconservatism in the 1990s.

That November, against the conventional wisdom of American pundits and pollsters, Republican gubernatorial candidate Christine Todd Whitman narrowly defeated Democratic Governor Jim Florio

Few knew that Long and Murphy's friendship would produce Ontario's "made in New Jersey" nightmare. (1)

Monkey See, Monkey Do

Los Angeles Times staff writer, Craig Turner, also wrote of the Ontario/Republican connection, instead comparing Harris to Newt Gingrich.

There is more at work here than the tendency of some Canadians to seek a dark cloud behind every silver lining.  The debate reflects the ongoing controversy over Ontario Premier Mike Harris' political and economic agenda, which reminds many of the approach of the U.S. Republicans, especially House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Harris was elected last June on promises to eliminate the province's burgeoning budget deficit and cut income tax rates by 30%. His enthusiastic budget-slashing--particularly when targeted on the poor, as in a 21.6% reduction in welfare grants--quickly earned him the nickname "Newt of the North," a sobriquet seized on by both admirers and detractors.

Harris' knife has cut a wide swath, leading to $5.88 billion in spending reductions over the next three years. As a result, tuition has risen 15% to 20% at most universities. Dozens of public hospitals are expected to close or consolidate. The cost of prescription medicine in the government-funded health care system is increasing for the elderly. Fares on the Toronto transit system are among the highest on the continent. More than 10,000 of the province's 81,000 government jobs are marked for elimination. (2)

What Turner may not have realized, was that Reform Party leader, Preston Manning, had played a role in Gingrich's 1994 victory.  The same Preston Manning who worked on Harris's campaign, even using their Ontario riding associations to give the budding Neocons a boost.

However, this "Newt of the North" was more of a "Whitman of the North", as he not only copied her platform, but also her actions.   Let's compare.

Back to Ziedenberg:

Whitman has spent the last three years cutting and fudging the state budget of $16 billion (US) to find the $1.2 billion needed to deliver her tax cut. She saved $26 million by robbing 30,000 senior citizens of their subsidized drug benefit plan. Twelve hundred of the state's 60,000 public sector workers were given their pink slips: Of the first 744 people to lose their jobs, 75 per cent of them were women, and 44 per cent were minorities. State aid to most school boards has been frozen. Trenton's Education Law Centre, a New Jersey public interest legal research group, is pressing the state courts to force Whitman to increase aid to poor schools by $400 million to fulfil commitments made by Gov. Florio. But under her tight-fisted, tax-cut induced budget priorities, no one knows where this money could come from. As well, tuition at New Jersey's public universities will rise by between 10 to 30 per cent.  (1)

Whitman introduced "Workfare", calling it "tough love", and holy cow if Harris didn't lap at her heels with his own tough love.

On May 31, 1995; Mike Harris told the Toronto Star "If I don't live up to anything that I have promised to do and committed to do, I will resign."  After promising not to reduce money for healthcare or reduce welfare benefits (page 7 of the Common Sense Revolution), he failed to keep his promise to step down.

Tim Hudak is now telling the Star pretty much the same thing, but how can we believe him?  He's learned from the master.

Canada's Neoconservatives like to think they're so clever, with their "new" ideas.  But there is nothing clever, nothing revolutionary, and nothing "new".  Every word and action comes from their American counterparts, who with the help of the corporate funded Tea Party and demonic Religious Right, have destroyed politics in the United States.

Ah you loved me as a loser, but now you're worried that I just might win

You know the way to stop me, but you don't have the discipline

How many nights I prayed for this, to let my work begin (Leonard Cohen: First we Take Manhattan, Then We'll Take Berlin)

First I took New Jersey.  But not On-tar-i-o (Tim Hudak's Swan Song)

To fellow Leonard Cohen fans, enjoy the video.  It will help take your mind off the rash you're developing, symptom of the Fear of Harris Lapdog Syndrome.  You won't get the song out of your head, but at least the itching will subside.





Sources:

1. First, we'll take New Jersey: The real roots of common sense, By Jason Ziedenberg, The Canadian Dimension, Sept/Oct 1996

2. CANADA : Ontario Gets a Tax Break, By Craig Turner, The Los Angeles Times, May 11, 1996

What Will Harper Try to Give Away This Time in 'Buy America' Fix?

Obama's new job strategy once again includes a "Buy America" clause, specifically stating that unless there are savings of at least 25%, infrastructure projects must use only U.S. materials.

Last time this happened, Harper gave away the farm for a few ears of corn, making him the brunt of jokes. According to Wikileaks, members of the U.S. government involved in the deal would ask "so has he called today? What are we getting now? Ha, ha, ha."

And indeed the joke was on us.

However, after giving them so much last time, what do we have left? I heard that he's offering the Parliament Buildings, the CN Tower and an 8" x 10" autographed picture of himself with Pamela Sue Anderson. (his wall is full) They could just crop out his image.

We have to quit depending on the United States for our economic recovery. They are hurting themselves. We need a Canadian strategy and if this hurts our border security deal (that erases our borders), then maybe there's a God after all.

Rob Ford Wants to Put Back Pictures of Queen in Toronto Public Buildings

The Queen's image has been retouched and will also appear on Toronto Subway Tokens.

Where is Barry Goldwater When we Need Him?

"I think every good Christian ought to kick [Jerry] Falwell right in the ass." Barry Goldwater

Many American Neoconservatives claim to have become politically active, after the trouncing of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 election. Deemed to be too far right, he lost to Lyndon Johnson, by one of the largest landslides in history.

Ironically, by today's standards, Goldwater would have been a moderate. He supported Gay Rights, and hated the Moral Majority. His call out for a butt kicking, was in response to Jerry Falwell suggesting that Sandra Day O'Connor was not committed enough to ending abortion.

He also once said that "I wouldn't trust Nixon from here to that phone. " and denounced Reagan's "parade of millionaires".   As to the lavish balls that the Reagans held in the White House, he thought them too ostentatious when so many Americans were suffering.

Goldwater was a Libertarian who wanted to dismantle the Welfare State, but he was not completely heartless.  Mind you, he also claimed that in war there no such thing as a civilian, so his humanity was not without its limits.
 
Recently, we have learned that 15.1 percent of Americans now live in poverty; the highest number in the 52 years that the Census Bureau has been tracking it.
 
Yet the Republicans are up in arms because President Obama wants to eliminate $467 billion in tax breaks for wealthier Americans and corporations, and they won't hear of it.
 
Wall Street is again nervous, but as we know, when Wall Street gambles and loses, taxpayers are expected to bail them out.  But when the American people, those same taxpayers, are suffering, that's just too bad.  They're on their own.
 
The corporate funded Tea Party waves their flag, and accusations of being "un-American", are never directed at those hording all the wealth, only at those waiting for the promised "trickle down".
 
Those lazy sinners.

The Republican presidential candidate race is coming down to two men: Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.

Though a devout Mormon, Romney is a moderate. He's for civil rights, Gay Rights, and even supports abortion for victims of rape and incest.

He should be pleasing to both the caring Evangelicals and right leaning Democrats. And he would probably make a pretty good president, though I would prefer that Americans turn down the volume on their right-wing noise machine, and give Obama more of a chance.

But Americans are suffering, and they will always blame that suffering on those in power, forgetting the horrible mess that the man inherited from George Bush.

However, it would appear that the Republicans believe that Rick Perry has a better chance at winning the White House, based partly on the fact that he can fill auditoriums in public prayer.  He's the man to bring God back to government, come hell or high water.

Another contender, Michelle Bachmann, claims that the recent hurricanes are God's wrath for the First Amendment, that separated Church and State.  Perry takes that even further, holding rallies against the Amendment and his state had Thomas Jefferson (the author of it) removed from their school books.

I'm reading a book Just leave God Out of it, by Tim Riter and David Timms of the private Christian University, Hope International  in Fullerton, California.

They open by telling the story of a men's religious retreat in Australia.  After a morning of prayer, they took a break to play a little rugby.  During the game, one of the men suffered an injury, resulting in his ankle being bent an odd angle.

Everyone scrambled, looking for ice and determining the quickest route to the hospital.  But then one of the camp workers came over and asked the group, "Has anyone prayed for him yet?"

"Ouch!  Great and intense teachings on prayer were ignored."  So the men prayed first and then took the suffering individual to the hospital.  According to the authors, this was a wake up call as to how much "cultural creep" was affecting society.  Secularism was clashing with "godly values".

"This challenge is serious. The value of our culture subtly squeezes us into their mold, at the expense of biblical values."

I would have put more value on easing the man's pain and making sure that he got immediate medical attention, but biblical values say that he must suffer while first they pray.  No mention of God-given medical know how.

I'm reminded of a joke I heard several years ago. 

Warnings of a flood had prompted an evacuation, but one man was without transportation to leave, so his neighbours offered him a ride.  He refused saying that he was going to put his faith in the Lord, who he felt certain would save him.  So instead he prayed.

The inevitable flood took place, and rescuers in a boat found the man in his water logged home praying.  They offered him a ride, but again he refused, saying that he was going to put his faith in the Lord, who he felt certain would save him.

Finally, as the waters engulfed his home, and the man was standing on his roof, a helicopter hovered overhead offering a life line. But again he refused saying that he was going to put his faith in the Lord, who he felt certain would save him.

The man drowned and when he got to Heaven he asked God why he had forsaken him.  The reply:  "But I sent you a car, a boat and a helicopter.  What more did you want from me?"

Rick Perry would not only be that man on his roof, but the tyrant who would lock the entire community in their homes, so that they could go down with him.

I wonder what Barry Goldwater would want to kick on this guy.  It's obvious that he's already taken a swift kick to the head.

I remember my mom being afraid of Barry Goldwater.  She was an English war bride who had lived through the bombings, and felt that he would lead us into another world war.

I can't believe I'm now looking back to the glory days of the Republicans, when Barry Goldwater was the voice of conservatism, and perhaps their last voice of reason.

A Harper majority and Rick Perry in the White House?  Heaven help us.

It's a Good Thing Tim Hudak Wasn't Around When Plavnice Podatransk Came to Canada

The latest Tim Hudak ad focuses on his grandfather, a Czech immigrant who "believed in the value of hard work". There is even a close up shot of his immigration papers dated 1898.

All I can say is that it was a good thing that Tim Hudak wasn't around then, or this man would never have stood a chance, given his attitude toward what he is now calling "foreign workers".

Or imagine if Jason Kenney had been in charge of immigration, instead of Clifford Sifton, who was then Minister of the Interior under Wilfred Laurier.

The Laurier government adopted an open door immigration policy, not only to settle some regions, but to provide labour for railways and mines, and Sifton tackled the task with a vengeance.

Working with companies, aggressive schemes were created to lure "foreign workers" including those of Czech descent. The schemes usually involved partial payment for transport overseas and an offer of cheap land. It's highly unlikely Mr. Podatransk got off the ship and said "what now?"

Jobs were usually waiting for them and all efforts made to help them settle in.

I find it amusing when the new conservatives (neocons) claim to have made it with no help from the government, forgetting about things like public education and universal healthcare.  And while they brag about their heritage and hard working ancestors, they forget that most early immigrants to Canada, arrived under some kind of scheme.

Dalton McGuinty's "scheme" is not designed to lure immigrants, but is still being painted as an attempt to pander to "foreign workers", while many Ontarians are still unemployed.  Non-immigrant Ontarians.  However, the program is only for highly skilled workers, who are currently unemployed, underemployed or precariously employed.

We get to benefit from their skills, instead of riding in their cabs.

And it is only a tax credit.

Personally, I think that all corporate tax cuts should be tied directly to employment.  We keep hearing that giving more money to big business creates jobs, but that has not been the case.  President Obama allowed the Bush tax cuts to go through on that promise, but months later, after tallying the jobs created by giving more money to the rich, it came up flat.  In fact NO JOBS WERE CREATED at all.

The NDP are wisely keeping out of the debate, but Conservatives are whistling a xenophobic tune, beginning with a tweeted campaign slogan: "Hire a foreigner instead of your neighbour"  Another on Youtube includes: "Too bad it’s not for you… 10,000 only for FOREIGN workers. Ontario workers need not apply. You just get the bill."

Randall Denley, running in Ottawa West reminded us that "People who come from other countries, I guess I call them foreigners."  And Peterborough's Alan Wilson wailed that "Some people could lose their jobs and be replaced ... That's something that we really will be opposing. We'll be focusing on our own people here getting jobs." 

I'm glad they cleared that up though, because I now know that "foreigners" can't be my "neighbours", can't live in Ontario, and are not "people here."

I hope they publish a handbook, because I'm confused.  Maybe a little drawing of what an Ontarian is supposed to look like, so I can compare it to images of my neighbours. 

And if they aren't the right colour should I start a campaign demanding that they move?  Maybe burn a cross?

During the peak of the recession when people were losing their jobs at an alarming rate, Jason Kenney allowed an enormous increase in migrant workers.  Where was Hudak's outrage then?

2008, 2009 and 2010 peaked for "temporary foreign workers".  But then Kenney's colleague, Gerald Keddy, suggested that this was necessary because unemployed Canadians were "no good bastards".

You can see why we need a handbook.

But to sum it up.

Immigrants are "foreigners" here to steal jobs from "no good bastards", who may be your neighbours, because those "foreigners" can't be, since they don't really live "here".

Yes Plavnice Podatransk was a lucky man.