Friday, July 03, 2009
The self-absorbed shithead who thinks himself head of state....
The prime minister of Canada is not the head of state. That position belongs to the Queen of Canada.
The prime minister of Canada is not the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. That duty rests with the Governor General of Canada.
The prime minister of Canada, as head of government, is entitled to a 19-gun salute, to a maximum of once per year, when at an established saluting station, as an honour gained at having been appointed by the Governor General. Canadian Forces Administrative Order 61-8 leaves no part of that in question. (It apparently has not been re-issued as a DAOD).
The prime minister of Canada is not entitled to a Canadian Guard of Honour. Ever. Heritage minister James Moore is wrong. But then, that's hardly surprising. The Conservatives simply took a matter of national military ceremonial intended for visiting foreign dignitaries and twisted the meaning to include their fat-assed, lense-loving, megalomaniac. Josef Stalin would be proud.
Harper stood there, in all his magnificent corpulence, having never crossed the threshold of a CF recruiting office door, because he missed that part of his life, with nary a decoration to his name and took a salute from the Governor General's Foot Guards... in a blatant and intentional breach of protocol.
If Harper wants a salute, he should visit me. I'll give him exactly what any mealy-mouthed politician is entitled to. I'll even tell him what to wear:
Groin protection.
The Emperor Steve

Wednesday, July 01, 2009
In my mind I still need a place to go, all my changes were there
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
If it's not a part of their agenda, why are they doing it?

Because the only solid base of support they have comes from their Reform/Alliance roots.
Scott, JJ, Eugene and Dan have all commented and here, I pointed out that, regardless of what Harper and Day tell us, they do have an agenda they have not divulged. Beyond what has already occurred, this is evidence of government policy which has not been given a public airing and which was not advertised anywhere in the Conservative Party from the last election to the present.
The Conservative government will not co-sponsor a United Nations resolution calling for a global moratorium on the death penalty, breaking with a nearly decade-old tradition.And what does it take to sponsor a resolution?An official with the Foreign Affairs Department says Canada will vote in favour of the resolution when it comes to the floor of the UN General Assembly in December, but will not sponsor it.
"There are a sufficient number of co-sponsors already, and we will focus our efforts on co-sponsoring other resolutions within the UN system which are more in need of our support," said Catherine Gagnaire.
Seventy-four other countries have put their names forward as sponsors, including the United Kingdom, Australia and France.
Last week, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day surprised the House of Commons by announcing that Canada will not oppose the execution of a Canadian citizen on death row in Montana for two murders. Day said the new policy will apply to "murderers" such as Ronald Allen Smith who have had a fair trial in a democratic country.
Canada's former ambassador to the United Nations, Paul Heinbecker, said co-sponsorship doesn't involve much effort - a simple phone call or the raising of a hand during a meeting.Putting us in lock-step with, guess who.He said in the absence of a radical change in the wording of such a mainstream resolution, the decision not to co-sponsor signifies a departure for the Canadian government.
"You can only take these as signs of how the government wants to be seen," Heinbecker said.
The United States and Japan are among the few democracies that have traditionally voted against anti-death penalty resolutions at the UN.Making the Harper government even more visible as Bush water-carriers.
This is the world stage and it has everything to do with the image Harper wants to portray to his minority constituent base.
As others have already pointed out, the Harper Conservatives conducted a poll, which they kept as quiet as they could, only to discover that those in favour of capital punishment constituted a distinct minority of the population.
It's that minority to whom Harper is now playing.
This is the tough-guy image movement conservatives believe in. It doesn't matter that Canada was viewed globally as an honest broker with strong moral values. Now we are to be viewed, not as a country which punched above its weight diplomatically, but one which punches. Period.
The fact that the Conservatives executed a deliberate change in direction at the UN makes it a matter of national policy.
In short, this has been on the Conservative agenda all along, hidden from view to prevent a national debate the Conservatives could not win.
But, as we draw nearer to the inevitable federal election Harper and Day must get a recognizable signal out to the most narrow-minded of their supporters. It's a sample. A mere whisper intended to inject calm into the ranks of the radicals.
Give me a majority and I will give you everything you want.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Happy Birthday Canada

One hundred and forty years ago today the British North America Act of 1867 came into effect, superseding the Act of Union of 1840. With the colonies of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and the Province of Canada (Ontario and Quebec), the Dominion of Canada was formed.
The term "Confederation" was and is used, although Canada then and today is not actually a confederation. It is a federal state.
It remained a British dominion and lacked legislative independence. That would not come until December 11th, 1931 with the Statute of Westminster. With that Act, Canada's position in the British Empire changed. It was, for all intents and purposes an independent country and could, if the parliament of Canada approved, withdraw from any arrangement with the Crown and the British Commonwealth, however, there was still a legislative hook which remained with Britain.
At the time in 1931 when several British Empire parliaments were debating the merits of assuming more powers of independence, Canada was having difficulty determining a constitutional amending formula among the provinces. Despite the independence provided by the Statute of Westminster, the guarantor of the division of powers between provinces and the federal state remained in Britain. Constitutional amendments remained in the hands of Westminster; not Ottawa.
That changed in 1982 when the British North America Act was patriated to Canada and renamed the Constitution Act of 1867. At that time, Canada's status as a fully independent nation was formalized.
It's a slow process, apparently. And if anyone thinks it was peaceful I would recommend getting back to the history books.
Happy Birthday, Canada!