| |
Blog of Adam Daifallah -- author, journalist, law student. Lover of politics, writing, golf, curling, fitness, fashion, bacon and maple products -- not necessarily (but probably) in that order. Partisan of the Anglosphere. Contact me via email at adam@daifallah.com.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Delegated conventions rock
I was meaning to blog about this before the fact, but I see Liberals have voted -- just barely -- to keep the delegated convention for their leadership selection process.
Way to go Liberals!
I really think they've made the right choice here, having been through several of the one-member, one-vote processes myself. The way the Liberals do it now is by far the better system -- just look at the excitement and energy of the current race.
And besides, Belinda Stronach can't buy the leadership next time under this system.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 7:21 PM
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
My last post on the nation -- I hope
David Mader, aka the smartest person I know, has thrown down the gauntlet on my reasoning for supporting the Québec is a nation concept.
First, since everyone wants to talk about the definition of what a Québécois is, let me give you my definition. It is not Jean-Pierre Blackburn's. Québécois nationhood is a civic nationhood based on a variety of things including a common language, culture, values and legal system. Contrary to what Lawrence Cannon sort of said (he was too incoherent to fully understand), you do not have to be a "pure laine" francophone to be a part of it. Anyone living in Québec can be a part of the Québécois nation, or they can choose not to be. Some Québébers would consider themselves only as part of the Québecois nation, some as part of the Canadian one, and many to be part of both. And yes, the motion should have said Quebecker in the English version.
To David's thoughtful commentary: I was not trying to say theories are irrelevant in this matter. I am a small-l liberal in the tradition of Locke just like Andrew Coyne -- who is, by the way, someone I consider a friend and with whom I agree 99% of the time. I am saying that Andrew's concept of a Canadian nationhood, which he likes to draw back to Lockean liberal principles -- is irrelevant in the context of Canada in 2006. I don't even like the concept of nationalism, and I wish it weren't something we had to deal with. But Andrew and Tom Axworthy want to fit every province and every Canadian into a tight, perfect little intellectual box -- the "one size fits all" view of citizenship promoted vigorously by Pierre Trudeau -- that few Canadians, especially those under the age of 40, I think, can associate with. I think that vision of Canada is passé and cannot be salvaged -- arguably it never could.
Of course the principle of recognizing "reality" has limits, and I would never subscribe to anything that would throw into question the equality of all Canadians before the law. The examples David cited are not the same as the Québec/Canada question. Here we are talking about fundamental issues of basic identity, sense of self, sociology and citizenship and how people see their own existance.
I should have been more clear on what my "facts on the ground" are. Those facts are that just about every francophone in Québec -- even hardcore federalists -- are nationalists. There's no getting around that. Many of those people like Canada, feel Canadian and want to continue being Canadian, but they are usually Québecers first. They have a loyalty to Québec first. That is what the reality is. Canadians outside Québec have a hard time accepting that and may never do so, as the poll results David posted demonstrate. Indeed, this reluctance to accept the Candian reality may lead to the end of the country. I sincerely hope it won't and I'm willing to make concessions to ensure it doesn't happen. I suppose some, maybe even Coyne, would say no to any concessions and that if that reality is there, there's no point in staying together. "So be it." Let's go our separate ways. It was Trudeau, after all, who said the country should go out with a bang, and not a whimper. But my view is that if we accept what Canada really is and stop pretending it is something it isn't, we can move forward together.
And I think we've all lost sight here of why this happened: Ignatieff made it a front-and-centre issue of his leadership campaign, the Bloc seized on it, and Harper had to act. Voting down the Bloc motion would have led to yet another "national unity crisis" and given the separatists 60 seats in the next election. Harper would have probably lost a couple of cabinet ministers and MPs.
One more thing: In reading comments on this blog and judging by the private communication I have received since the TV show, there is a generational issue at play here -- noted today by the Ontario Premier. I notice very little interest in this issue amongst younger Québecers and even younger Canadians. I don't know if this means there is a larger acceptance of the "reality on the ground" by our age group, or whether it's just indifference. But it is pretty clear that this is a fight that concerns the battle-scarred veterans of the Trudeau/Levesque years more than anyone else.
UPDATE: Promise, last thing -- I'm not sure where Andrew stands on this, but some would argue that any kind of nationalism is incompatible with liberalism. The Trudeau schoolers -- great defenders of individualism and liberalism they claim to be, despite their confiscatory tax policies -- are not opposed to nationalism. They just oppose any nationalism that isn't theirs.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 5:18 PM
I agree with Andrew Coyne!
This is preposterous.
(For those who don't read French, Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn has suggested it is up to Québec sovereignists to define what a Québecois is.)
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 5:07 PM
Where are the free speech advocates?
Via Maderblog:
This is profoundly disturbing.
To base a line of argument on something being "offensive to have to hear" is one I figured we would eventually face, and it's no surprise that it's being used on a campus.
This has nothing to do with the abortion issue and everything to do with fundamental freedoms. Let's pray that it is not allowed to stand.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 4:45 PM
The Trudeuvians' last gasp
A bit related to TVO show: Gerard Kennedy has landed Tom Axworthy's endorsement because of his stance on the nation resolution. Kennedy has established himself as the candidate of continuing the Trudeau legacy, which, if just for the sentimental effect, should gain him some votes. It will be interesting to see how much he plays this up at the convention, which starts today. I think this calls for the first-ever Daifallah.com poll.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:20 AM
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
A green house for a green couple
Innovative use of YouTube by Olivia Chow.
Let's give Jack and Olivia credit here; they are practicing what they preach. This is commendable. (I guess they finally moved out of socialized housing.)
Those arm towel bars are disturbing, though.
(Via JKelly)
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 11:24 PM
They also stopped beating their wives just recently
For a good laugh for all you conservatives out there, listen to Ralph Goodale's speech jeremiad endorsing Bob Rae for leader. I can't recall ever seeing someone squeeze in so many anti-Tory epithets in such few sentences. In the span of thirty seconds I noted:
-"neoconservative damage to the fabric of Canada"
-"the Harper regime"
-"the most rigidly ideological government in Canadian history."
-"narrow and extreme base"
-"if you are not useful to them, they leave you behind"
-"mean and vindictive"
-"Republican in its values."
Impressive performance.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 8:19 PM
I can't keep up
I cannot ever recall as busy a time in Canadian politics as the last few months. Two more stories to add to the fray today: the Green Party is now a serious force to be reckoned with, and on the weekend, look out for Stéphane Dion. Add Kennedy's stance on Québec = nation, and you have the makings of a totally unpredictable weekend. And let's not forget the Alberta PCs!
As for the debate tonight on TVO, it went well and I'll be curious to see the feedback in comments. Andrew Coyne is very passionate about this -- more so than I -- and so is Tom Axworthy. But the bottom line for me is that their position -- favouring the status quo -- is a recipe for neverending discussion of this issue and a continuation of the tiring dominance of la question nationale in the Canadian debate. Trudeaupian Utopianism, as I called it tonight, tries to fit all parts of Canada into a fancy theoretical framework that is not grounded in reality. That vision is out-of-sync with today's francophone Québec and many younger and new Canadians. It ensures the Bloc continues to get half the Québec seats and that the PQ is the second provincial party in Québec.
Andrew is correct to say the Canadian constitution is legitimate and applies in Québec. But as we know, and as I said on TV, in politics, perception is reality. The reality in Québec is that there is a sense of unfinished constitutional business. Someday, sometime -- maybe not even in this lifetime -- the issue will have to be confronted, and the status quo won't do.
The motion has passed now, and we'll have to see the fallout.
UPDATE: The video from last night's show is up -- click on "Tom Axworthy -- The Politics of Nationalism" on the left-hand side.
MUST READ: Yes! Yes! Yes! Someone else agrees with me on this. (Via Staples.)
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:00 AM
Monday, November 27, 2006
Nation fallout
-- Warren Kinsella on Gerard Kennedy's "surprise" announcement to oppose the motion:
What he has done, here took guts, and character, and leadership – something the Liberal Party of Canada desperately needs.
I doubt it. Could it be that Kennedy kept mum on this because he was courting Justin Trudeau and a condition of getting his support was opposing Harper's motion?
-- Michael Chong's decision to resign from Cabinet rather than to vote for the motion is the right thing to do. I'm a bit surprised, but at the end of the day, you have to be able to look at yourself in the mirror.
-- Still haven't got enough of this debate? Watch The Agenda with Steve Paikin tonight at 8:00pm on TVOntario, where I'll be discussing the issue with Andrew Coyne and others.
UPDATE: Must read Joan Tintor.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 4:08 PM
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Voting day shenanigans during Alberta PC leadership
Daifallah.com has obtained the following observations from an unimpeachable source who was working at a polling station in Alberta yesterday. Definitely concerning:
This weekend, Canada has been paying attention to the PC leadership vote in Alberta. Lost in the shuffle, however, are the rules governing this election - or, more appropriately, the lack thereof. In short, the words "kangaroo democracy" come to mind.
For one, there is no membership cut-off. Yes, you read that right. You can buy memberships at the voting station right before you vote. The result? People who have never been party members - or worse yet, who are members of other parties - can show up by the droves on election day to vote in an internal party process.
Another area of deficiency is the lack of training the poll staff were given. I personally witnessed differing rulings on identification requirements throughout voting day.
Perhaps the most glaring issue related to partisan polling by "neutral" election officials in the polling area. During the advance polls, I witnessed a poll clerk sending people who did not have memberships ($5.00 each) outside to a van operated by one candidate, who would then give the voter a membership for free.
If these types of antics happen in Canada, one can only imagine what goes on in third world nations. Clearly, the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta has an obligation to its members to create a much more fair, open, and principled process - particularly given Alberta's one-party history.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 11:05 PM
Bob Rae's $
DemocraticSPACE has posted fundraising totals for the Liberal leadership contenders. You can read who gave to whom and how much. Particularly interesting are Bob Rae's figures. There a bunch of usual suspects -- just count the number of Sorbaras and Desmarais on that list!
But he also appears to have received large sums from a bunch of unexpected sources, including some Conservatives. I found Donna Segal (wife of Senator Hugh), Hal, Maruja and Duncan Jackman (the maximum --- $5,400 -- each), Murray Frum (father of David), Allan Gotlieb, Isadore Sharp (founder of Four Seasons Hotels) and even Mulroney pal Sam Wakim.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:23 PM
Alberta PC leadership
Well, that makes two leadership results we'll have to watch next Saturday. Alberta is headed to a second ballot, and it isn't looking good for Jim Dinning, the man who's been campaigning for the job for more than five years. As noted here last week, Ted Morton experienced a late surge in support, and his candidacy has become the manifestation of the discontent with the wildly out-of-touch Klein clique and they way they've run the province since about the year 2000. Tough to predict a winner at this point, but the Dinning camp can't have much reason to be optimistic.
UPDATE: Commenters were right -- look out for Ed Stelmach.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:05 PM
Saturday, November 25, 2006
All nation, all the time
The whole nation debate is starting to die down. Reactions were as expected, with the vast majority of the press opposed -- especially in the English media. Andrew Coyne, aka the Prophet of Doom, predicted the end of Canada. Some were a little more nuanced, if not agnostic. And others were just confused -- such as Jason Cherniak, who in typical Liberal fashion decided at first to support the measure only to reverse his position 180 degrees and oppose it about an hour later.
The biggest problem here, as I've discussed a couple of times in the past, is language. In French a nation does not equate to a country or nation state. It is thought of more as a community of people with similar defining characteristics. For that reason, and after having lived here for a couple of years, I've come to accept and even embrace this fact. As I said a few weeks ago, this thing isn't even a debate in Québec. It was agreed upon a long, long time ago. Yet it still gets people immensly worked up in the other provinces.
Recognizing Québecers as a sociological nation, which the resolution to be voted on next week does, is just affirming a fact. A lot of people don't like it, but I see it as nothing more than recognizing reality. Whether the "nation" concept can or even should be constitutionally enshrined is another debate.
UPDATE: Apparently Harper and his staff aren't sleeping much these days, because there's yet more coming down the pipe. This is a great idea. I cannot keep up with all the announcements coming out of Ottawa.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 1:51 PM
Friday, November 24, 2006
Straight talk on "neoconservatism"
Steve Paikin's The Agenda has again shown why it is the best public affairs show on Canadian TV (and no, I'm not saying that because I was on it once.)
If you have a spare hour this weekend, this episode is well worth watching. (Video on the left side of the screen is "Mike Harris - The Death of Neoconservatism".)
The first part of the show is a one-on-one talk with Mike Harris, who clearly articulates what a modern vision of conservatism should look like.
The second half is a debate on neoconservatism -- what that term is, what it means, and who is one today. I really wish ever political science professor and journalist in Canada could watch this show. Each of the guests, with the exception of Colin Moores (whoever he is) were very insightful -- especially Clifford Orwin, who is one of the only people who could truly be considered a neocon or "Straussian" in the country.
The word neoconservatism is a much abused and overused term in Canada. I wanted to bring this up when I was on The Agenda. The fact is, as Orwin noted, there basically is no such thing as Canadian neoconservatism. Mike Harris is not, as Orwin explained, a neoconservative. John Baird is not a neoconservative, as he was labelled on the lead-in clip on the show I did. I am not a neoconservative. To be "neo" anything, one must have had to be something else first. I have never been anything other than conservative, and as far as I know, neither has John Baird, Tony Clement or Mike Harris or any of the other people usually labelled as Canadian neocons.
Watch the whole show.
UPDATE: Classic abuse of the term in today's Globe by John Ibbitson, who should know better:
For as long as the Conservatives remain in power, Ottawa's raison d'être will be to increase economic competitiveness while shrinking the federal government's own fiscal presences. This is as close as Canada is ever going to get to genuine neo-conservatism.
This is mixing up what is actual conservatism with neoconservatism.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:29 AM
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Another great day for conservatism
The list is starting to get quite long.
No complaints here.
UPDATE: I'm happy to acknowledge that things are pretty easy when you have these kinds of economic numbers to work with. I hope everyone thanks God, Yaweh, Allah, whatever, every day that they live in this great country. We are so fortunate.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 9:04 PM
Is that allowed?
This morning my alarm clock went off, as usual, to the sound of radio station CHOI-FM. But to my surprise, I heard the voice of independent MP André Arthur -- not talking politics, but doing a commercial for a local Chrysler dealership. Are MPs allowed to do that? Anyone know?
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 8:37 PM
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
On nationhood, Part XVII
I am just as surprised as everyone else with Harper's move today. At once he has disarmed the Bloc, pissed off some usual allies (I'm sure Andrew Coyne is having blood pressure problems), and, as soon as the pundits are done venting, removed this issue from the table for a very long time -- hopefully for good. We would be wise on this day to remember the words of our founding PM on Québec:
“Treat them as a nation and they will act as a free people generally do — generously. Call them a faction, and they become factious.”
— Sir John A. Macdonald
UPDATE: Actually Andrew appears to have lost it. That response is way overboard.
UPDATE II: Now that I've had a chance to think more about this, wow! Was that ever clever on Harper's part. He's also erased the significance of the nation debate from the Liberal convention, giving his preferred candidate -- Iggy of course -- a much better chance of winning.
UPDATE III: Given the Liberals' support of this in the House today, I guess Trudeauvian federalism is officially dead.
UPDATE IV: Predictably, Paul Wells is also disappointed. I think these early responses are a bit too cynical, and I include myself in that. Harper is a strategic, long-term thinker. He doesn't do things for quick hits. Yes, this move will be politically helpful in the short-term. But I think this hints at Harper's desire to settle the Québec question once and for all, perharps in a second term. Harper knows that the conservative movement can never achieve its full potential until the constitutional issue is sidelined.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 5:54 PM
ADQ: Ban burqas and school boards, fund farmers to turn pig shit into electricity
The ADQ continues to be a political enigma.
A few years ago they were the pro-school vouchers and pro-energy from windmills party. Today, they are the pro-ending equalization, pro-tax cut, pro-banning the veil, pro-abolishing school boards and pro-government funding of pig farmers to turn manure into energy party.
The ideological incoherence of the party is truly baffling. I'm not sure how one can reconcile these various platform planks. And banning burqas? Aside from the fact that it would never survive a Charter challenge (founded on either the Québec or Canadian charters), it is a fundamentally illiberal idea.
It makes for a tough choice on how to vote for conservatives in Québec provincial elections.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:06 AM
Thanks
I just want to thank everyone who takes a moment out of their day to visit this site. For the past few weeks we've been consistently averaging more than 1,600 visitor sessions per day for the first time. It's humbling to know even one person would be interested enough to come here. I appreciate it.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:04 AM
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Tories can't do anything right: media
CBC Online's top story from yesterday.
CBC Online's top story, in the Canada section, today.
I'm starting to question if a majority government is even possible given the current state of the Canadian media.
How can the Conservatives win converts when everything they do -- such as standing up to imperialist Communist human rights abusers -- is spun negatively? And we're just about to head into 2-3 uninterrupted weeks of all-Liberal, all-the-time with the lead-up to the convention, the election of the new leader and the honeymoon aftermath.
As Robert Stanfield once noted, if he walked on water, the next day's headline would be "Stanfield can't swim."
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:03 PM
Alberta PC leadership
This Saturday, Alberta Tories head to the polls to pick their new leader. From everyone I've talked to, the outcome is still uncertain. Everyone agrees that Jim Dinning will come out on top on the first ballot, but from then on nothing's guaranteed. Of interest has been the late surge of Ted Morton, who could, if he can get some of the weaker candidates to endorse him, mount a serious challenge. Of course, it's impossible to predict because this is the most wide-open leadership voting system in the world: any Albertan can show up at a polling station Saturday, but a membership on the spot, and vote for the leader. I suppose this is a just system for such a dominant party -- the leadership vote is essentially a presidential-style election to choose the next Premier.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 11:11 AM
Who knew?
John Tory has an idea.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 11:10 AM
Monday, November 20, 2006
A first of its kind?
Attention McGill students!
Next semester a very special course is on offer in the Canadian Studies department ... it's Canada's first-ever (as far as I'm aware) university course on conservatism! Congratulations to Tasha, who will be the instructor.
Conservative-minded Canadians should be elated. This is a real breakthrough in the slow struggle to inject some semblance of balance into course choice on campus. Amid the sea of "womyn's studies" classes and the like (available on almost every campus across the country), those who do not subscribe to the PoMo world view now have one -- yes, one! -- class to claim as their own on one -- yes, one! -- solitary campus! But it's a start.
Space is quite limited, so sign up now.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 7:10 PM
Keep at it, Prime Minister
You'd be hard-pressed to find a finer compliment than this.
UPDATE: I might be in the minority on this, but I think Harper's performance at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit was probably his finest moment in office so far.
UPDATE II: Does Galloway even spend any time in the UK? Maybe his RESPECT party would have more seats at Westminster if he actually stayed in his country and campaigned. Or, maybe being out of the country actually gets him more votes.
UPDATE III: And Arab Canadian groups want to know why the Conservatives won't meet with them?
"The idea of Canada threatening China is absurd," Galloway said at an event sponsored by the Syrian Canadian Club. "The whole point of politics is to talk to each other, even if you hate each other."
The Crown rests.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 2:33 PM
Sunday, November 19, 2006
On nationhood
I know. The whole Ignatieff/Québec nation debate is getting tiresome, but it won't go away. Andrew Coyne is continuing to bang away, and there are still interesting points being made. The latest is that Stéphane Dion has come up with a "compromise resolution" to avoid this whole thing boiling over on national television at the convention in two weeks.
Of all the big policy debates in the last couple of years, whether it be nationalized daycare, the Iraq war or anything else, I cannot ever recall seeing such unanimity in the media and amongst pundits about the complete wrongheadedness of an idea. Aside from a few fancophone Québecers like André Pratte and some Québec Liberals like Marc Garneau and Denis Coderre, I detect virtually no support for the concept of constitutionally entrenching nationhood for Québec anywhere in the country -- at least not at this time.
The most interesting aspect of this debate has been the damage -- perhaps fatal -- it has inflicted upon Ignatieff's candidacy, complete with a crypto-mocking cover story in the latest Maclean's. The damage done to his bid has been for two reasons: one, as noted above, the idea is just plain disliked.
But two, as a prominent Québec political scientist sagaciously pointed out when I ran into him in the library last week, it is the fact that Ignatieff proposed it that is the real problem. It would be one thing for someone who had fought the battles of Meech and Charlottetown and the last five election campaigns with the Liberals to propose a complete break with their constitutional position since the Trudeau era. But it's entirely another thing for an outsider who has lived abroad for 30 years to prance in and call for such a radical shift. Ignatieff has no battle scars from past constitutional fights; who is he to come and tell the Liberal Party to unceremoniously drop its heritage and do things his way?
With only two weeks to go until the vote, and with Ignatieff having been completely bereft of any momentum for at least 3 months, it now looks like his leadership bid -- along with his big constitutional idea -- are toast.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 1:38 PM
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Justin Trudeau: "major national pest"
As usual, Bob Fulford speaks for the sensible silent majority:
In recent weeks, Justin Trudeau has upgraded his status from minor annoyance to major national pest. He's become a public brooder, one of those people who share their ego problems with TV viewers and newspaper readers. He's like a movie star agonizing over career problems. This process carries the risk of exposing powerful but rarely justified feelings of self-importance. Even so, those who indulge in it normally remain unaware of how they seem to others, particularly to the less fortunate. Trudeau has lately exhibited his feelings on CTV and Radio-Canada and in newspaper interviews, most notably with Joseph Brean of the National Post. It's clear he's trying to write his own life as a drama. Having done nothing particularly exceptional, he nevertheless believes his personal story acquires meaning to others simply because of his gifts -- charm, money, beauty, a silver tongue and a name wrapped in legend. Some part of him apparently yearns to be a victim, the most fashionable pose these days. We might imagine that would be hard to sustain for someone who arrived in the world so richly endowed. But he manages it by the clever trick of redefining his advantages as burdens. His gifts, he obviously likes saying, force upon him a special sense of responsibility. Read the whole thing. UPDATE: Unrelated, though also noteworthy in today's Post: George Jonas reports on John O'Sullivan's excellent and important new book on Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul II.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 1:37 PM
Friday, November 17, 2006
Who's the party of human rights? Part II
Canada's backbone grows stiffer by the day. This is not just impressive, it gives me great pride.
Let us please stop talking about our country as a "middle power," a point Lord Black has made several times. Canada is an important player in today's world, maybe even amongst the Top 10. We have always been capable of assuming a leadership role, as evidenced in the past under both Liberal and Conservative prime ministers, and we are doing so again.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 3:18 PM
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Friedman and the monetarist consensus
Usually, this blog doesn't like to write a lot about the story everyone else is talking about, which is one of the reasons people tell me they visit here. But in the death of Milton Friedman, who lived to a hearty 94, consider the following: did his genuis and the immense success of his ideas actually end up hurting what he believed in more than they helped?
A tight money supply, free markets, competition, choice, etc... have won the day in the economic debate throughout the Western world, hands down, for the past two or three decades. Because of these (Friedman's) policies, the West is very rich, and the economic cycle is much less harsh than it has ever been. The middle class is well off. This, in turn, has led to a middle class guilt complex which has resulted in parties that promote increased government spending, more social programs for the less well-off and further redistribution of wealth being frequently (but thankfully, not always) elected.
So are Friedman's ideas victims of their own success? I think one could make a serious case for it.
May he RIP.
UPDATE: Amongst the most interesting and thoughtful tributes are the New York Sun's (special section!) and the Wall Street Journal's.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 11:02 PM
Random question of the day
When does the New Democratic Party cease being new?
Just wondering.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 7:56 AM
Another victory for freedom
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Who's the party of human rights?
Probably not what you expected.
Given this and so many other examples over the years from across the Anglosphere, it still amazes me how many people still associate support for human rights with the political Left, when the complete opposite is true. It's frustrating.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 9:49 PM
Left out in the cold
Some Canadian Arab groups are apparently upset with the Harper Tories. The CBC is on the case:
Some of Canada's largest Arab organizations say they are being frozen out by the Conservative government. Although the Tories have run an active outreach campaign to several ethnic communities — including the Hindu, Sikh, and Chinese communities — Arab groups say the party appears to have made a decision to write off the Arab vote. ...
"We don't do partisanship here. We would like to work with all parties," said Mazen Chouaib, executive director of the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations. "But unfortunately, the Conservatives have refused dealing with us, and we're facing great challenges dealing with these guys." Hmmmm. I have no idea why.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 7:07 PM
Video from The Agenda is up
A number of people asked if the video from Monday night's TV Ontario debate on conservatism is up -- it is. You can view it by going here, and on the left sidebar, click on "Hugh Segal -- Conservatism in Canada." The debate starts about 15 minutes in.
PS -- In case you're wondering, that Joe Clark jab was not arranged ahead of time to set up that video clip. It was pure coincidence! And I was wrong, Clark only won 2 seats in Quebec in 1979, not 3. My mistake.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 5:54 PM
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
It's official
Wooing Québec
We complain, we get results.
I wish! I'm just kidding, of course. But good for them.
The government is demonstrating a keen awareness in identifying its problems, and then fixing them.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:56 PM
The Trudeau cult ...
...is sooooooooooo alive and well. Wayyyyy too alive and well.
The arrogance. The condescension. The self-centeredness.
It's positively .... Trudeauvian.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:48 PM
Crack open the champagne
Bob Tarantino, formerly of Let It Bleed, is back! Visit often.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:45 PM
Monday, November 13, 2006
Victory for freedom in Ottawa
TV tonight
Tonight I will be a guest on The Agenda with Steve Paikin, which airs at 8:00 PM on TV Ontario. The video of the show should be available on the website later. The topic is the state of Canadian conservatism, and the guests are Senator Hugh Segal, John Capobianco, Lisa Samson, Patrick Martin and myself. Tune in.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 3:19 PM
An alternative view of Rumsfeld
Interesting take by Doug Feith, who worked closely with Rummy, disputing many of the claims put forward by the ex-def secs enemies.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 9:23 AM
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Reflections on Remembrance Day
I don't know how many people caught the Ottawa Remembrance Day ceremony yesterday on TV, but it was moving. (Watch it at ctv.ca if you missed it.) It was incredible to see such a large crowd -- apparently the largest in years -- in such inclement weather.
I found out that there is an online resource where you can check out enlistment forms from World War I, and I was able to find my great grandfather's. I don't know if such a tool exists for World War II, which my grandfather fought in, but if there is, I'd love to know about it.
Over the years I have noticed a dwindling understanding of and appreciation for Remembrance Day, mainly amongst young people. This is due primarily, I think, to the fact that memories of these wars are getting more and more distant. Today's children are, for the most part, not born to grandparents who served. The idea that one would have to give up everything -- and in many cases, be forced -- to fight in a far off country land is so foreign to my generation and the following ones.
I will always do whatever I can to promote remembrance on this day and to support our military however I can. I've even thought of joining, and who knows, maybe I will. I recently joined the board of the foundation of the Naval Museum here in Québec City, which is a very tiny contribution, but it's at least something.
Never forget!
UPDATE: Good post by Steve Paikin.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 5:22 PM
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Remember
Friday, November 10, 2006
Liberals: America sucks, but we want Howard Dean to keynote our convention
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Started your Christmas shopping yet?
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Nope, never heard of that book. Try Amazon.ca
The irrepressible Barbara Kay beat me to the punch with a column today on a topic on which I had written a post that has sat for a week on the blogger.com server, marked "draft". But here it is anyway:
Many of you have probably heard (or know from experience) that Mark Steyn's new bestseller, America Alone, was unavailable in Chapters/Indigo bookstores for about the first two weeks after its release. Steyn lays out the shocking details in a recent Macleans column. The National Post also reported on the book snub, which prompted this response from the chain's rep in the paper. More recently, Paul Wells has reported chronic understocking of his new book in the stores, but it has apparently been corrected.
(As a side note, I am a bit surprised and happy that both Macleans and the Post are allowing this anti-Reisman/Chapters/Indigo stuff in their papers, as they could be jeopardizing future advertising dollars. Although maybe they don't have any now or just don't care.)
Although Rescuing Canada's Right wasn't nearly as big as Wells' and Steyn's books, I can report similar disappointments. A full-page excerpt from our book was published in the National Post in early November last year, just after the book had been published. Yet, actual copies of our book didn't make it onto Chapters/Indigo shelves until about two weeks later. (They were apparently sitting in the warehouse.) Also, our publisher had been told by the Reisman reps that our book would be getting prime "placement" in their stores, yet as far as we know, it was relegated to the standard Canadian politics shelves in all stores except the Bay/Bloor flagship, where it was -- at least for a few days -- prominently displayed.
Barbara Kay is right, but there's another point to be made here: this kind of bias, miscalculation, stupidity -- whatever is -- against conservative books (or books that are of interest to conservatives, as I suppose is the case with Wells) causes real economic damage to authors and book publishers. Writing a Canadian political book is already un-lucrative enough. Having the country's monopolistic book chain working against you makes things even worse.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 2:11 PM
Back to the drawing board
Well, it's looking like the majority of the predictions made by various "experts" have come true: the Republicans have lost the House of Representatives and may even lose the Senate, depending on the outcomes of the Virginia and Montana races. There will probably be recounts in at least Virginia, which will delay the final outcome for days.
There were some gratifying results last night -- I was glad Joe Lieberman hung on, just because I appreciate his courage on foreign policy. Some non-insane Democrats such as Chris Carney in Pennsylvania -- who took out an incumbent Republican -- have been elected to the House. And some undesirable Republicans lost, such as Rep. John Hostettler of Indiana and Sens. Lincoln Chafee and Mike DeWine.
I was sad to see Michael Steele lose the Maryland Senate race, as well as Jim Talent in Missouri.
There are lessons to be learned from these results, and many of them parallel the Canadian Liberal experience, especially with regards to the corruption and rudderlessness that creeps in when a party has been in power for a long time.
But the biggest lesson is one we should already know well: abandoning your base results in dire consenquences.
For a while it looked as though Republicans would keep winning forever. But the Democrats have shown, in the words of columnist David Warren, that all trends are reversible. We should always remember that.
UPDATE: By the way, there can be little doubt now that John McCain will be the Republican presidential nominee in 2008.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 9:23 AM
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Stop choking me and let me vote
I know these U.S. midterms are driving people's temperatures up, but this is ridiculous.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 3:05 PM
Monday, November 06, 2006
When it rains, it pours, edition # 3,439
Yet another new blog to read
Go here ...
...for everything you wanted to know about Ahmad Chalabi and what has happened in Iraq.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 6:39 PM
Tomorrow's elections
The Republicans may lose, but they may not. We'll see.
If they do lose, here's a good look at why.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 2:13 PM
Sunday, November 05, 2006
La tromperie de Guy Bertrand
La nouvelle proposition de Guy Bertrand à l'effet que le Québec et le Reste du Canada devraient jouer l'un contre l'autre pour obtenir le droit de représenter le pays au championnat mondial d'hockey attire beaucoup d'attention médiatique. Quant à moi, il n'y a aucun avantage à aller de l'avant avec cette proposition si l'on considère que la présente équipe canadienne a déjà assez de difficulté à bien performer au championnat, tout en comptant dans ses rangs tous les meilleurs joueurs du pays en entier.
En outre, Maître Bertrand se sert d'un faux argument pour appuyer son propos. Il prétend que le championnat canadien de curling fonctionne déjà de cette manière. Ce n’est pas vrai. Le championnat de curling est une compétition entre toutes les provinces -- alors, un tournoi entre 10 équipes provinciales -- pour le droit de représenter le pays aux championnats mondiaux. Ce n'est pas le Québec vs. l'ensemble des provinces anglophones.
On devrait garder le statu quo.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:03 AM
Friday, November 03, 2006
A Canadian in Hollywood makes sense?
Candid comments from Lorne Michaels.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 10:35 AM
Ottawa rowdiness
Wednesday I attended Question Period in Ottawa. I can't remember another time when the House was so lively and partisan. (In case you missed it catch it here.) This was the day after the announcement on income trusts, and the Liberals were going crazy. At one point it looked as if Jim Flaherty and Ralph Goodale would get into a brawl.
It was great entertainment. Screw decorum, this is fun!
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:05 AM
|
