Kanter On Politics

Friday, July 28, 2006

Jim Dinning donated $25 000 to the Liberal Party Mistakenly in 2002 - It was really meant for Paul Martin!

From Inkless Wells {Link}Paper trail


Further to your conversation with Steve Snyder, I am pleased to provide you TransAlta's support for Project 2000.

On a personal note, I worry that our governments across the country have become a 'hotbed of rest' and I can only hope that Mr. Martin and others might be able to re-inject a sense of urgency, passion and priority into the affairs of our nation. Soon.

Kind personal regards,

[Signature]
Jim Dinning
Executive Vice President
Sustainable Development and External Relations

- Jim Dinning, on the letter included with his donation of $25 000 to the Martin Leadership campaign.

So, are we really supposed to believe Jimmy D isn't Alberta's Paul Martin, or even worse John Turner?

Edit: The Fiberals seem to be all over this to. Read this exchange over at Liberal Pebbles between her(I assume) and a Dinnite. And read the full articles from LexisNexis which she pulled. Must be a high powered lawyer to have access to Lexis... I think this has legs....

Monday, July 03, 2006

Military Spending: Whats next?

While setting military procurement goals by an outsider might be frowned upon, it is an interesting exercise to examine what the military lacks. What does Canada need to have a truely independent military?

Air to Air Refueling - We are currently converting two Polaris aircraft to tankers, however our new C-17s are designed with a different system. Our system is currently basket, probe, while the C-17s is designed for boom and receptacle. We should either ask for the C-17s to be fitted with a probe for refueling, or order new Air to Air refueling aircraft as the Australians have done. Our new C-130s should also be fitted with probes (as some are already in allied air forces)

Airborn Control and Warning - Deploying our fighter and transport forces independently dictates that we should also have a mobile command and control system to defend these expensive assets from attack. Currently, we recieve this services from allies, but countries smaller than Canada are buying this capability themselves. Australia is buying 6, since it will beusing them for context observing of their norther coast (since these aircraft can monitor ships aswell). Canada could problably suffice with two or three.

Arctic Soveriegnty - A fleet of Predator, or Global Hawk UAVs would problably be acceptable to monitor our Arctic. Expanding Canada's coast guard with two new heavy ice breakers, in addition to expanding our medium and light ice breaker fleet. It may also be advantageous to keep the armed ice breaker program, by creating heavy ice breakers with air and sea defence systems. The breakers would be in the Navies control

On shore landing under fire - Canada likely needs one or two amphibious assualt ships

Offshore air platform - With the likely purchase of new air superiority fighters, in addition to new Helicopters, Canada needs an aircraft carrier, in similar size to the Italians or Spanish carriers.

Fighter Planes - We should begin the process to replace our fleet of F-18s by 2020 with F-22s, F-35s, or comparable European aircraft. F-35s and other aircraft would be possible to operate from ships as well as small fields is fitted with Vertical takeoff options.

Coast Guard - Buy a fleet of fast boats for interdiction, such as USA Coast Guard Cutters.

New destroyers - They are old and need to be replaced.

I would estimate these costs at around 30 billion dollars, with every project costing 2 billion except for fighters planes and arctic sovereignty at 8 billion each, an dnew destroyers costing 4 billion in total. I have left out the Halifax refit, MCDV replacement, as they can be delayed.

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Liberal Party Falling further and further Part 2

Here, from Paper Dynamite Online, is a Liberal! refuting Kinsella's points (refer to previous post for the points. Enjoy.


On June 21st, Warren Kinsella wrote a post designed to buck-up Liberals. The post was precipitated by a series of rather discouraging media reports proclaiming the Party to be in dire straits. Regrettably, Kinsella's efforts seemed to work.

What follows is a point-by-point response to that June 21st post.

1) The Liberal Party's obituary has been written prematurely many times before.

- The past is not always prologue.

2) The liberal Party is the most successful and most disciplined Party of any Western democracy, and Harper is replicating that kind of discipline in the CPC -- "Imitation is flattery, etc.", Kinsella writes.

- The fact that Stephen Harper has successfully inculcated the CPC with "party discipline", is not a reason for us to feel good. In fact it means we won't be the beneficiaries of the "shooting themselves in the foot" factor.

3) The Conservatives ran a perfect campaign, Liberals ran a crappy one, and still Harper could only manage a slim minority.

- Last time around Liberals had the fear factor on their side, that has now evaporated -- the Harper government is not "scary". Moreover, the CPC got 24% of the vote in Quebec in the previous election and they will probably increase their popular support and seats in Quebec in the next election.

4) Conservative ideology is ideology. Liberal ideology is winning.

- As we've seen from Harper's first day in office onward, he'll do almost anything it takes to win a majority. The Conservative hobbyhorses of "tax cuts, law and order and so on" have been put in service of that end. So in addition to "Party discipline", Harper has also adopted the Liberal "win at all costs" attitude. Yet another reason not to be happy.

5)"The Martin period was an aberration ..."

- Look I'm not a huge fan of Martin or his advisors but clearly if any period in recent Canadian political history was an aberration it was the Chretien period. What is more aberrant than having a divided conservative opposition? The old Mulroney coalition -- the West, Quebec and rural Canada -- is beginning to re-emerge and that does not bode well for Liberals.

There's nothing wrong with being a "Nervous Nellie" as long as you're prepared to buckle down and plan your way out of the situation producing the anxiety. But being a Pollyanna during difficult times is clearly a recipe for disaster.

Monday, June 26, 2006

Liberal Party Falling further and further

The Liberal Leadership candidates are having problems selling memberships to their corrupt morribound party to ordinairy Canadians, who no longer trust the liberals at all and don't want to live in a kelptocracy.

"People are hesitant [to buy memberships] because of what happened in the last leadership, so many people remain undecided. So it's a bit harder to sell memberships and I am saying this because I am hearing this from all of the campaigns." - Toronto lawyer Martha Hall Findlay, one of the 11 candidates seeking the Liberal leadership. Link


The liberals are having such difficulty signing up members, maybe they won't even get a full cohort out to the convention in Montreal. They are already making excuses, blaming the Federal Accountability Act for their failures!

I know the 2003 campaign finance law exempted our leadership race from the law, since the race was already underway when the law came into force, but we have to get serious about corruption, so thats why we had to act to bring down the pork barrel promise selling liberal leadership race. Now the unelected Senators are thinking of modifying the act, to either add a new transitional implementation clause, or delay the entire bill until December.

Here are the current transition clauses:

Transitional Provisions (page 83 Bill C-2)
"
60. Sections 403.35 and 403.36 of the
Canada Elections Act, as they read immediately
before the coming into force of this
section, apply with respect to the documents
that a registered association must provide in
relation to the fiscal period ending after the
coming into force of this section.

61. If a candidate was, before the coming
into force of this section, deemed under
section 365 of the Canada Elections Act to
have been a candidate, then section 451 of
that Act, as it read immediately before the
coming into force of this section, applies with
respect to the documents that the official
agent of the candidate must provide in
relation to the election next following the
coming into force of this section.

62. If a nomination contestant was, before
the coming into force of this section, deemed
under section 478.03 of the Canada Elections
Act to have been a nomination contestant,
then section 478.23 of that Act, as it read
immediately before the coming into force of
this section, applies with respect to the
documents that the financial agent of the
nomination contestant must provide in relation
to the nomination campaign of that
contestant."
At least Harper is standing up to liberal corruption, asking for the Bill not to be delayed.

I say the Bill should include a program to recover the $40 million from adscam that is still unaccounted for from the liberals, why should they have special treatment above what any common criminal would get?

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Warren Kinsella is deluding himself

Recent stories about the Liberals death kneels are true, Canada started to switch paradigms in the last election, and are only continueing to do so. Countering Kinsella's (June 21st) points is so easy to the point hilarity!

"The Liberal Party's obituary has been written so many times, I've wallpapered the rumpus room with the results. Twice. When you are in Opposition, there's always Nervous Nellies who will say you're doomed. As I recall, the aforementioned S. Harper was being measured for a political pine box as recently as November 2005. By the same Nervous Nellies. Yawn. "

The Liberals just keep falling deeper into disarray, not able to mount even an effective opposition. they feels so entitled to government, by the way they speak they haven't been kicked out by the people of Canada! Stephen Harper's political obituary was never written in 2005, and won't be written for years to come, unlike all the Liberal leadership contendors!


"Like it or no, the Liberal Party of Canada is the most successful political machine in Western democracy. Why do you think Mr. Harper has imposed no-second-chances communications discipline on his team in Ottawa? Because he studied the successful Liberal eras (ie. not the Martin blip), and he knows that the Lib's discipline helps them to win elections. Imitation is flattery, etc."


If the Liberal Party is so successful, then why did it loose seats to the Bloc, NDP, and us in the last election! The Liberals have no discipline to emulate, except trying to get money for themselves and their friends, while standing for nothing.

"Ask any smart conservative, on either side of the border: there is always more "gettable" Liberal/Democratic vote. That's a lesson that Tories/Republicans have learned the hard way, too many times. For instance: in the 2006 Canadian federal race - which saw Harper run a picture-perfect campaign, and Martin offer up a shambling, chaotic mess - the Conservatives could still eke out only a narrow minority. That tells me (and Stephen H., who I still like, by the way) that Canadians tend to lean more liberal than conservative. It's in their DNA. And it's why conservatives have to work harder, and get out their vote."

The last election was indicative of a paradigm shift, not a aberation! The liberals can believe these arguments all they want, it just digs them into deeper holes.

"Conservatives' ideology is their ideology: tax cuts, law and order, and so on. That kind of stuff. The Liberal ideology is, to be blunt, winning. Grits like to win, and they've had a lot of practice at winning. They're good at it. Right now, they're miserable, sure, because they LOST. But there's no better motivator for a Liberal than a loss. It gets them to where they most like to be: with their foot on a Conservative or New Democrat windpipe, watching them gasp for air until Election Day. That's when Liberals are happiest. It makes them smile."


Conservative ideology isn't tax cuts, its the government only taking enough money for it to do what it is supposed to do. The loss demoralized the Liberals, and they are down for the count.

"The Martin period was an aberration - but, ultimately, seasonal and arguably necessary. Like cicadas, Liberals turn every twenty years or so to political disasters (eg. Turner, Martin), get reminded why out-of-touch, out-of-work business executives make lousy leaders, and then get back to finding real Liberals. It'll happen in another twenty years, just you watch. In the interim, they'll be okay. "


Have the Liberals shown themselves to be in touch with the people since they lost? No. So why the expectation anything will change? Their party is broken beyond repair.

"And that, at the end, is why Stephen Harper is probably most optimistic: the Martinite elements in the Liberal Party, whose names are interchangeable with "losing," are still around. They haven't learned their lesson, yet.

Until they do, Stephen Harper is pretty safe. It's not a permanent condition, but it'll sure feel like that for a lot of Liberals for the next while."

For the next while? Ha! Forever!