True Patriot Love

  • 4/27/2011
  • P-ublic E-nemy
  • Labels: ,

  • Canada's general election is a week away (May 2, 2011). As of this post, revolution is in the air...joining our embarrassingly high per capita C02 emissions. But before I address any of that, it's important to know how we got here.

    I previously introduced you to the opposition leader, Michael Ignatieff. Today I'll introduce you to our incumbent prime minister, Stephen Harper (Conservative Party of Canada):

    Stephen Harper is a leader who can be trusted to run the country, manage the economy and protect our security in the greater public interest at a time of global uncertainty. Uniting our federation – and keeping his commitments – he is delivering on a people-focused agenda.

    If anything, he's a remarkably honest man. Here he is, issuing a warning to Canadians who might vote for his party:

    Stephen Harper warned “a party that does not have the interests of this country at heart, will be looking to exploit any incoherence or instability for its own purposes.”

    Such a disclaimer should not come as a surprise. I don't understand why all the opposition parties keep harping on about Harper's "hidden agenda". The guy has publicly written about his desire to "not have the interests of this country at heart":

    During and since the recent federal election, we have been among a large number of Albertans discussing the future of our province. We propose our province move forward on the following fronts:

    1. Withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan
    2. Collect our own revenue from personal income tax
    3. Start preparing to let the contract with the RCMP run out in 2012 and create an Alberta provincial police force
    4. Resume provincial responsibility for health care policy. We can afford the financial penalties Ottawa might try to impose under the Canada Health Act.

    As economic slowdown, and perhaps even recession, threatens North America...It is imperative to take the initiative, to build firewalls around Alberta.

    Once Alberta's position is secured, only our imagination will limit the prospects for extending the reform agenda. To cite only a few examples, lower taxes will unleash the energies of the private sector; easing conditions for charter schools will help individual freedom...

    Sincerely yours,

    Stephen Harper, President, National Citizens' Coalition

    International readers are probably wondering why Canadians put this fugitive from the Branch Davidians in charge of our federal government. After all, Americans would only trust him to lead Texas...not the entire country.

    In our defense, over 60% of us voted against him. Hell, even his own compound thinks he's kind of nutters.

    A clear majority of Albertans reject the hard-edged "Alberta First" provincialism being promoted by prominent conservatives in the province, a new Globe and Mail/CTV poll suggests.

    The survey of 750 Albertans, conducted last week, showed a large majority of Albertans support national programs such as the Canada Pension Plan and the Canada Health Act.

    The Ipsos-Reid poll tested public support for a manifesto published recently by six prominent Alberta intellectuals, who urged the provincial government to build a "firewall" around the province by withdrawing from national programs.

    Stephen Harper, a key proponent of the provincialist strategy, said yesterday that he is not disheartened that his views have apparently not been embraced by the majority of Albertans.

    "I think there is a lot of flux to these ideas -- they are really just beginning to take hold," Mr. Harper said.

    Naturally, our british electoral system rewards such popular support.

    So why do less than 40% of Canadians support this man? Some people hate taxes like the Abrahamic religions hate babies with foreskin. It doesn't have to make sense. They're dirty & someone needs to cut them without pity.

    Hands off Venezuela!

  • 4/22/2011
  • P-ublic E-nemy
  • Labels: , ,
  • Now that's "Foreign Aid" !

    He's from Texas. He's a Republican. He's not Ron Paul. Despite these obvious intellectual disabilities, Congressman Ted Poe makes a coherent argument against government waste:

    I agree, cutting $400 billion is really not much of a cut, especially in these times when Congress continues to spend more and more money. Maybe it's time to reconsider our foreign aid that we send to countries throughout the world.

    Now, this map over here to my left shows the world, and most of it is in red. All of those countries that are in red on this map receive American taxpayer foreign aid.

    We don't separate the countries one at a time and vote up or down on whether they ought to get American money. I think if we did that, most of these countries in red wouldn't be seeing any American money. With the way the rule works, we put all 150-plus countries in one package, and we vote for all of them.

    ...we just keep sending it and sending it and sending it, and we send it to countries that many Americans don't even understand why we send it to those countries...

    But here is something that most Americans may not know about. We give money to Venezuela. Why do we give money to Chavez and Venezuela? He hates the United States. He defies our President, makes fun of our Nation. We don't need to give him any foreign aid.

    Of course, you could nitpick.

    The United States appears "in red" on the congressman's map, even though it only receives Chinese - not American - foreign aid.

    As for Venezuela, Americans may not approve of George Carlin's rule over that country. But they're sure to support the reconstruction efforts taking place on Maria Corina Machado's face:

    In fiscal year 2010, the Venezuela account showed $6 million. For fiscal year 2012, the administration has requested a little less for Venezuela -- $5 million.

    The funding comes from the Economic Support Fund, which, according to the State Department, "promotes stability and U.S. security interests in strategic regions of the world."

    Members of a local group called Súmate who had received U.S. aid for a project on electoral observance "were accused of conspiracy and betrayal. The trial against them, which was initiated in 2003, is still pending."

    In a 2006 article based on Freedom of Information Act requests, the Associated Press reported that Chavez accused his opponents of taking "gringo money" to undermine his regime.

    Source: PolitiFact

    Of course, that's not fair.

    Perhaps this money is supporting doctors, nurses, & generic drug producers looking to improve the lives of the most destitute and needy.

    Or perhaps Dambisa Moyo was right all along, and all this money ends up in the hands of a corrupt cabal:

    Another administration document says aid helps "strengthen the capacity of non-governmental organizations to monitor and report on government performance" -- in other words, to be a watchdog of the government, not a supporter.

    Source: PolitiFact

    Of course, it's a judgment call.

    Sure, they could fund NGO's who support the government in dealing with crippling droughts & floods.

    But then who would give the U.S. State Department's annual 'Human Rights Report' that air of impartiality?

    Venezuela is a multiparty constitutional democracy with a population of approximately 28 million.

    The following human rights problems were reported by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), the media, and in some cases the government itself: unlawful killings, including summary executions of criminal suspects; widespread criminal kidnappings for ransom; prison violence and harsh prison conditions; inadequate juvenile detention centers; arbitrary arrests and detentions; corruption and impunity in police forces; corruption, inefficiency, and politicization in a judicial system characterized by trial delays and violations of due process; political prisoners and selective prosecution for political purposes; infringement of citizens' privacy rights; restrictions on freedom of expression; government threats to sanction or close television stations and newspapers; corruption at all levels of government; threats against domestic NGOs; violence against women; trafficking in persons; and restrictions on workers' right of association.

    Of course, impartiality is priceless.

    Precisely because it doesn't exist:

    Venezuela worse, Colombia better on rights: US

    Human rights conditions worsened over the past year in Venezuela, but improved in Colombia, the US State Department said Friday in an annual review.

    In Venezuela, ruled by firebrand President Hugo Chavez, the US cited a litany of abuses including "unlawful killings, including summary executions of criminal suspects; widespread criminal kidnappings for ransom; prison violence and harsh prison conditions."

    In Colombia, the Santos government "made demonstrable advances in improving the human rights environment" and implemented new policies to accelerate the return of land to displaced families.

    Of course, Congressman Ted Poe is right.

    ...we just keep sending it and sending it and sending it, and we send it to countries that many Americans don't even understand why we send it to those countries...

    It's time we reconsider foreign aid and save American taxpayers money. We are at war in two countries now. This debt is tremendous. We have a lot of issues in this country, and we need to start taking care of America before we start sending American money to countries throughout the world. It's a time to reconsider foreign aid.

    Copyright 2010 VeeeATCH!