Relocated

Please visit me at http://nbcdipper.ca/

Preserving The Blogging Dippers

Alright! Enough on this attack on all Blogging Dippers (most who are not anti-semitic), and time to be constructive for the future.

I am going to post a list of suggestions that will hopefully be constructive in improving the Blogging Dippers as opposed to destructive.

First of all, the single operator model that the Blogging Dippers and Liblogs is run on is not working, because when the single operator says something controversial, the entire blogroll is dragged into it, innocent or guilty.

I suggest that the Blogging Dippers get two more operators, in addition to Robert. In this way, the work involved in maintaining a blogroll can be shared and the damage won't be so great when one of the operators says something controversial.

I still think Robert should stay on as an operator, because for one, he owns the server space and domain name. Without those, there is no Blogging Dippers. None. And let's face it, Robert has put a lot of work into the Blogging Dippers.

Secondly, I think that the Blogging Dippers needs a racism/tolerance policy, one that can be a guide regarding the sensitive nature of this issue. Let's be clear on what is acceptable and what is not.

I hope that the adoption of this recommendations will keep the Blogging Dippers unified, as opposed to being split in the manner of Babble, EnMasse, and Bread'n'Roses.

Please comment on this at the new location of Northern BC Dipper.

Cherniak, Keep Your Personal Fights Personal

Here goes Jason Cherniak, again, trying to engulf the blogosphere with his personal conflicts.

Except this time, I'd say he's gone too far. He is abusing his powers as moderator of Liblogs. He is trying to get Blogging Dippers to revolt.

Any Blogging Dipper with integrity should be demanding that Mr. McClelland step down from his position for this shameful display. Either that, or they should attempt to create a competing Blogging Dipper list that does not spew hatred online. I cannot believe that the members of the party of Stephen Lewis could be even remotely comfortable with Mr. McClelland acting as an unofficial spokesperson for them.

See what Cherniak is trying to do. He is using a personal argument to divide his opposition. Classic Divide and Conquer. Imagine how the Libloggers would react if Robert wrote a post asking them to create a new blogroll/revolt.

I find it even more funny that Cherniak is asking Blogging Dippers to revolt considering his history of personal attacks on them.

But Cherinak is going too far this time. He should mind his own business. It is digusting that he is using a personal argument to divide as all.

I am personally going to, and I hope every other Blogging Dipper does too, stand behind Robert and support his continued role as moderator and host of the Blogging Dippers. I am going to support a united Blogging Dippers. I am not, however, going to support every comment that Robert has made.

We are the Blogging Dippers. We decide how we want our organization structured. Not Jason Cherniak. Us!

Please comment on this at the new location of Northern BC Dipper.

Flip-Floping Away

Dion and the Liberals have flip-flopped again.

First they support a federal anti-scab bill. Then they are against.

What policies do the Liberals support? I dunno, they keep changing their mind.

The only real public policy they have is the income trust, which creates a tax loophole for corporations because the Liberals are too chicken to say that they want to lower corporate tax rates.

Well, until they flip-flop on that.

Is Change Coming To Quebec? Dunno (Corrected)

Correction: I used the wrong polling data. See update below.

Now, I can't say I know too much about Quebec politics, but this is rather interesting.

A poll by La Presse puts the Liberals (PLQ) at 32%, the PQ at 25%, and the Action Democratique Quebec (ADQ) at 30%.

Now plug this poll into this nice seat-projector generator nicely pointed out by Paul Wells.

The seat results? PLQ 47 seats, PQ 33 seats, ADQ 45 seats.

Now, the question I'd have is this: would such an election result be enough to begin a transformation of Quebec politics from a sovereigntist-federalist axis to a left-right axis?

Update:

Okay, let's use the real polling data, and not just polling from the Quebec City Region.

PLQ: 36%
PQ: 31%
ADQ: 21%

With the seat results from the generator as follows.

PLQ: 52
PQ: 54
ADQ: 19

I still think my question above would still be valid.

Another interesting thing is the seat results for the Quebec City Area, using the polling data I was using before.

PLQ: 1 (-8)
PQ: 1 (-1)
ADQ: 9 (+9)

Cities Need More Taxing Power

It looks like Toronto Mayor David Miller is trying to kick-start a campaign to get 1 out of every 6 cents of GST revenue.

It's well known that cities need the money to repair their crumbling infrastructures and to provide services, however, I'm really not sure that getting money from the federal government is really the best idea, for two reasons: 1) What the federal government can give, it can take away; and 2) Cities are constitutionally the responsibility of the provinces.

I'd say what needs to happen is that cities need to have more access to tools which allows them to raise more money. I say that the provinces needs to give cities the ability to levy sales and income taxes (to a limit), on top of the present ability for municipalities to levy property taxes. That way, cities can both have the ability to collect taxes in the way that is most fair to its citizens and that cities don't have to depend on income that can be cut at the whim of a government.

Today's cities are expected to do more. Let's give them the tools so that they can succeed.

Nice To See Some Butter With Those Guns

It looks like Harper is announcing $200 million in reconstruction aid to Afghanistan, in addition to $1 billion over 10 years.

While it is a pittance compared to how much we are spending on military combat over there, it is a least a step in the right direction. I believe we do have to have the troops there to protect any reconstruction projects taking place, and that removing the troops may leave a vacuum which would be filled by something that is not beneficial to the Afghan people in the future. I'm not sure that we need so much firepower though.

I do have the feeling that we are going to have to invest more money on reconstruction aid before we can say "mission accomplished." I mean, we can kill as much insurgents as we want in Afghanistan today, but if the root causes of insurgency are not kept to a minimum, then everything we have spent in Afghanistan, including the reconstruction aid, would have been a waste.

But I do have the feeling that it is the NDP's consistent position on Afghanistan, much as I'm not personally not sure about it, which lead to this announcement. As for the Liberals and Dion, well, they still can't decide on a position regarding Afghanistan.

"Do You Think It's Easy To Make Priorities?"

Explain this one to me.

Dion did not have the guts to whip his caucus' vote when it came to defending equal marriage.

Now he wants to whip his caucus regarding the opposition of extending anti-terrorism laws?

What does this man stand for? He keeps flip-flopping like a live fish out of water, taking opposite stances on things at seemingly random intervals.

Official NDP Cooperation With Liberals Silly Idea

It seem that a few bloggers are suggesting that the NDP should now strike some sort of "official cooperation" deal, or even a coalition.

Unfortunately, this is one of those silly ideas that appear smart before one looks at the facts. It's one of those ideas that look good according to the Left/Right spectrum idea. However, the political spectrum does not work all of the time.

Note, before I go on, that Canada has the Single Member Plurality (SMP) electoral system, which does not really allow for cooperation. I'd prefer a more proportional electoral system, but since we currently live with the SMP system, we have no choice but to work with it.

Let's look at what has happened to the NDP every time we cooperate with the Liberals.

1962: Conservative Minority: Liberals get 99 seats, NDP gets 19. NDP helps Liberals.
1963: Liberal Minority: Liberals get 128 seats, NDP gets 17. NDP helps Liberals.
1965: Liberal Minority: Liberals get 131 seats, NDP gets 21. NDP helps Liberals.
1968: Liberal Majority: Liberals get 154 seats, NDP gets 22.

1979: Conservative Minority: Liberals get 114 seats, NDP gets 26. NDP helps Liberals.
1980: Liberal Majority: Liberals get 147 seats, NDP gets 32.

1984: Conservative Majority: Liberals get 40 seats, NDP gets 30. NDP helps Liberals.
1988: Conservative Majority: Liberals get 83 seats, NDP get 43. NDP helps Liberals, note that Liberals got more seats.
1993: Liberal Majority: Liberals get 177 seats, NDP gets 9. Liberals proceed with one of the most anti-progressive governments ever, with massive cuts to programs. NDP goes into gutter.

The key trend here is that every time the NDP helps the Liberals, the Liberals become strong again and the NDP goes nowhere. That is why the Liberals are so upset with us right now: they see us as a "get out of jail free card", and this time, we ain't cooperating.

Therefore, to avoid repeating history, the NDP must avoid official cooperation with the Liberals. This is why our current strategy, that of being a free agent, getting what Canadians want with whatever party will cooperate, is the best way that the NDP can go. The thing is, in order to attract new voters, the NDP must appear to be an independent party and not an appendage of some other. The NDP must not be aiming to be Canada's conscience (it's easy for Pinocchio to squish Jiminy Cricket), but its governmental brain.

But it time for us to all of us to face one fact: Harper is not the great Satan. If there is one thing that this Conservative Government has shown, it is that Harper is not the total doom of Canada. Therefore it is time to stop buying into this line: it's usefulness has come and gone. And it is this line that most people who want official cooperation between the NDP and Liberals use.

To be honest, the thought of "Fossil" Dion being Prime Minister of Canada scares me more than Harper and his non-existent "hidden agenda", and I don't want my party to be a stepping stone for Dion to get there.

NDP Fast Becoming Only Stable Progressive Standard-Bearer

Two things become more obvious to me as time marches by: The Conservatives are ready for an election, and the Liberals are not.

With a strong Conservative party, it look as if progressives have to invest their vote in a strong progressive party: the NDP.

Let's look at the situation for a moment.

The Liberals are weak, being led by "Fossil" Dion, who tends to waffle regarding important issues and is simply not a leader. Many Liberal MPs are angry at the direction in which Dion is taking the party, even saying it publicly to the press. They are desperate for candidates that they made a pathetic attempt to get NDP MPs to cross the floor. Their only actual policy is to restore income trusts - wow, so many people are going to rush out to vote for a policy which amounts to a tax loophole for big corporations. The Liberals are all over the place, trying to be endeared by all but impressing none. I guess its not easy to make priorities, huh?

The NDP, on the other hand, may not have the sheer polling numbers, but are strong. Jack Layton is a leader. You might not like him, but there is no way you can accuse him of not being a leader. The NDP is making policy proposals, such as banning ATM fees, which both put money back into people's pockets and are popular (and inspire people to take a closer look at the NDP the next time they vote). The NDP has remained strong on the environment, while the Conservatives are stalling and the Liberals are playing partisan games.

What do progressives need? A strong force to oppose Harper. It's obvious that the Liberals are not up to the task. The NDP, on the other hand, has been, and continues to be, the effective opposition against Harper.

I'm Back, For Now

If you have been keeping an eye on this blog, you'll notice that I have not posted anything or done anything with it in a while.

That's simply because I've been rather busy in real life, trying to, let's say, get into a better position to help my fellow citizens. Unfortunately, it didn't really pan out this time.

But thankfully, I now have a week off, so I should be able to get back into the swing of things for this blog.

All 3 fans of this blog can now breath easier!

Why Garth's Move To The Liberals May Have Been Smart

Everybody knows that Garth Turner has joined the Liberals. Now, I'm going to skip the utter hypocrisy of this on Turner's part (other bloggers have been doing just fine on that front), and say why this may have been a smart move politically.

Now, I assume that most politicians want to get elected again, and that Turner is the same way. I seems that Turner made the proper calculations and realized that he was not going to get re-elected as a Independent. How come, you ask? It's quite simple: Turner would have split the Conservative vote and allow the Liberals to come up the middle. While it is true that Turner was trying to reach out to the progressive vote, I would say that those types of people would have stuck with the NDP and Liberals, even if they were generally all right with Turner.

So, what does Turner have to do to get re-elected, if he can't be an Independent?

Go with the Greens? No, they only get around 4,000 votes, so it would be the same situtation as running as an Independent. But if would be an option if Turner wanted to go out with a bang.

The NDP? They get about 2000 more votes then the Greens. Besides, could you imagine Turner in the NDP? Not really.

The Conservatives? He's kicked out forever.

The only option for Garth to survive the next election was the Liberals. And considering that the Liberals have consistently held the seat for years, it is possible for Turner to get re-elected under that banner.

But can this plan go horribly wrong for Turner? Yes, the Conservatives tend to be real close in taking this riding every election. So, it would depend on who the Conservatives nominate. If they nominate somebody that is a social conservative, the voters will get scared and the Conservatives can kiss Halton goodbye. But, if they nominate somebody that does not have a social agenda, then Halton may be a possible win for the Conservatives.

Was it a smart move by Turner? I guess the electorate will decide.

The Manitoba NDP's Betrayal : Defend Democracy and OMOV (Edited)

Democracy in the Manitoba NDP has been snuffed out, and I am absolutely ashamed to call these people "New Democrats". The MNDP convention delegates voted to restore the Stone Age Delegate System and scrap the Modern One-Member-One-Vote (OMOV) to choose their leader. The actions of 263 delegates has removed the democratic rights of many.

Interesting to note who the enemies of democracy are:

A return to a delegated leadership convention was championed by the Manitoba Federation of Labour...

Now, I am a supporter of, and a member of, unions, but it is this type of action that makes it hard to counter the allegations that unions have a extremely disproportionate amount of power within the NDP. It looks to me that this change promoted by Labour on delegated leadership conventions is a selfish one, concerned with their power in the MNDP today at the expense of the grassroots in the future. After all, it is the grassroots that fuel the operations and success of the NDP everywhere today, and trying to cut them out of the loop today will just ensure that they are gone tomorrow.

Who else supported this? High ranking NDP members. You know, the ones that are rich enough to go to a convention and influence the vote. They seem to be so complacent about their power that they should be run out of office.

But anyways, does this have implications for the Federal and BC NDP. You betcha! I will go so far to say that OMOV is in grave danger right now.

There are factions of the party, federally, that want to do away with OMOV, such as the NDP Socialist Caucus:

20. Oppose 'One Member One Vote' Polling

Whereas voting mechanisms like One Member One Vote for leadership selection and/or policy determination have further atomized the membership, and reduced collective debate, discussion and movement building in favour of an exercise in top-down, manipulative, electronic polling;

Therefore Be It Resolved that this party rejects and removes One Member One Vote as a decision-making mechanism.

With the events in Manitoba, it is easy to conceive of a scenario where the forces of elite New Democrats and Labour could act to try to snuff out democracy in the Federal and BC NDP.

As grassroots members, we must say enough is enough. We must fight to protect the democratic rights of ourselves and others. Because, it is now known: there are forces that will take democratic rights away from us. We must fight them with every ounce of strength we have.

In fact, we must work to extend democracy, and remove the weighted system regarding Labour votes in the NDP's OMOV system. Because right now, this system makes some votes more equal than others, which is something that should be avoided as much as possible (I will grant some discrepancy for geographic considerations).

Personally, OMOV is very important to me. The choosing of a leader is too important to be left by some delegate that I must trust to represent my interests. In fact, I would take the removal of OMOV in the Federal and BC NDP as a sign that the party does not care about its members, and as a result, I would take my leave.

Edit, 06/02/2007 2:00 am: Changed the tone a little bit: there were some portions that could be been construed as meaning something else entirely.

Kennedy: The Chicken "Risktaker"

Remember the Liberal Leadership loser Gerard Kennedy and his plans to run in the West?

Win or lose the leadership, Kennedy is committed to running for the Liberals in the next federal election
...
But he did not rule out trying a riskier route to Parliament, attempting to win a seat in the Liberal-hostile West.
...
While running in the West would be risky, Kennedy cast himself as a risk taker...

Well forget that. Kennedy is running in Ontario, in the riding of Parkdale-High Park.

This turn of events is both funny and interesting to me.

For one, I guess that Kennedy is not such a risk-taker after all, huh?

Two, this shows that the Kennedy camp's assertion that Kennedy would improve the Liberals chances in the West was a lie. I mean, if a star leadership candidate is afraid to go into the West, then what does that say about what the Liberals think about the West in their electoral chances. The things is, the Liberals need to make a breakthrough in the West if they want to see a majority government again, but at the same time, the Liberals have basically given up on the West beyond the BC and Manitoba cities. Then again, the feeling is mutual among Westerners.

Finally, I see a Logic Error in the Liberals rhetoric. According to some Libloggers, Harper is the devil and must be removed at all costs. It would make sense, then, to send strong Liberal candidates to fight against the Conservatives. So why is Kennedy running against a strong New Democrat incumbent? Well, we all know the answer, but it was just interesting to point that out.

Well, I suppose that when it all comes down to it, Kennedy is a Liberal after all...

My, Cullen's An Incompetent Pork-Barreller

I keep on hearing about how the NDP's Nathan Cullen has supposedly sold out the environment for some rainforest preserve that lies in his riding. However, it looks like another Liberal attempt to hinder the NDP's attempts of creating good environmental legislation. Furthermore, this allegation shows how the Liberals are so out of touch with the issues in Northern BC.

The charge that is being passed along Nathan Cullen is making some sort of deal with the Tories so that he can have a $30 million rainforest preserve, the "Spirit Bear Rainforest", in his riding so that he can get re-elected. It's a nice sounding theory, but it really does not work.

The fact is, Cullen's riding, like my own, is populated by those that are for the most part near nature. It is populated by those that extract resources for a living. Combine those two and what do you have? A population that is not particularly wowed by a nature preserve. The fact is, the people that are most impressed with nature reserves are those that live in cities like Vancouver and Toronto, places where nature ain't so close.

And that is where the pressure for the Spirit Bear Rainforest came from, Vancouver and the Lower Mainland. This has been an issue in discussion for a long time down, with the BC "Liberals" finally giving some money to fund such a preserve. This money from the Feds coincides with the provincial financing.

If Cullen was to set up a deal with the Conservatives in order to perform pork-barreling in his riding, it would not be for a $30 million rainforest preserve. It would be such things as hundreds of millions into such things like the Prince Rupert Port Expansion Project. It would be Pine Beetle money. It is these type of things that would get the attention of Skeena - Bulkley Valley's citizens. The preserve would actually create the most votes in urban areas, which Cullen's riding is not.

If the Liberals are going to create a pork-barreling narrative, they should at least make it sound realistic. It's so sad that "Fossil" Dion is so willing to attack those that want to protect the environment so that he can delay action so he use the issue in an election.

Where Is This So-Called Deal?

I keep on hearing from the Liberals and the media that the NDP and Conservatives have struck a deal on environmental legislation.

The fact is, however, that I see nary a trace of any such deal. Let's look at the facts the Globe and Mail article gives:

The first fact that they give is that "..both [the NDP and Conservatives] frequently accused the Liberals of delaying tactics." I don't see how this fact adds up to some kind of deal. It's well known that the Liberals don't want to pass any environmental legislation so that they can use the issue in the election (yes, the environment can wait for a silly election, in their view). How does both parties pointing this out mean a deal?

The second fact that is given is that NDP environment critic Nathan Cullen's "...aides clearly have a relationship with Mr. Baird's aides." Well, if you are trying to get a piece of legislation passed and you don't have a majority, does it not make sense to be working with other parties? It's called Minority Parliament, people!

The Globe article mentions timelines as well. Funny thing is, they don't mention that Cullen's motion to try to have the Clean Air Act finished as soon as possible was defeated 11 to 1. Wow, it really sounds like the NDP and Conservatives are really in cahoots here.

So, I don't see a deal here just yet. Maybe there may be a deal, but that deal would have to meet the NDP demands. Layton and the NDP are not stupid enough to make a sub-par deal, not in this political climate. And considering that the NDP has voted against the Conservatives in every non-confidence motion, I don't see the NDP all of a sudden cozying up to the Conservatives.

But it is a minority parliament. Others can cut deals. For instance, the Bloc is sagging in the polls as of late and may want to neutralize the environment issue so that the other parties would not have a desire to have an election over it...

Liberals Simply Not Ready For Prime Time

Despite the bravado from Liberal partisans, it is becoming more and more apparent that the Liberal Party just is not going to get into government anytime soon.

For instance, Stephane "Fossil" Dion is willing to let a banned for life Liberal organizer who was involved in the sponsorship scandal back into the party. This is a stupid mistake to make, as it sends many messages to Canadians, such as: We are corrupt, arrogant, and have not learned from our past mistakes. Now, I not sure if that is really the case, but that is the message that is being sent out.

Another thing is that "Fossil" Dion is doing that shows that the Liberal Party is just not there anymore is that it has changed its position on the upcoming budget not once, but five times. Yeah, that is certainly the way to try to remove the opportunist, poll following image that the Liberals had during Paul Martin's reign.

Finally, have a look at "Fossil" Dion's new advisory structure. 28 people on it and that's just the tip of the iceberg. How the heck are the Liberals going to be able to make a timely decision? I mean, an effective group should have 12 or less members. I'm not sure Conservative advisory structures are organized, but I'm relatively sure that they are much smaller and can make effective decisions.

I won't even go into the shadow cabinet picks.

Right now, I seriously don't think that the Liberals have the cohesion in organization and messaging needed to win an election, or heck, be an effective opposition. Progressives have to invest their vote in a more cohesive, tightly run party in order to effectively combat the Conservatives.

The Liberals are simply not ready to win. I'll leave it up to you whether that is a good or bad thing.

With Environmental Heroes Like Dion, Who Needs Enemies?

Stephane "Fossil" Dion is supposed to be a champion of the environment, according to the rhetoric by his leadership campaign and political party.

However, looking at his words and action in the past and present, I've got the feeling that Dion is not going to do much for the environmental at all.

Let's look at his time as Environment Minister. As most people know, Dion got a few awards during his time on the job. Unfortunately, the awards were of the fossil of the year variety, which are given to governments that get much done on the environment.

As well, during Dion's time as minister, plans to increase oil-sands production by 5-fold were launched. As most know, the oilsands are one of the largest polluters in Canada, and such expansion would affect the environment greatly. Dion's response on this: that he knew nothing about the plan. Sure, and Paul Martin, as Finance Minister, didn't know anything about the sponsorship scandal.

And how about Dion's actions as Liberal Leader? Not much better.

For instance, Dion would like to see more so-called "clean" coal power plants to generate electrical power; never mind the fact that the technology is unproven and needs more research.

Most telling of how much Dion cares about the environment is his reaction to the NDP's hard work in getting Harper to create a all party committee where the Clean Air Act could be amended in its entirety. Instead of cooperating with the other party and creating good environmental legislation, Dion and the leaders instead attacked the NDP, accusing them of proping up the Conservatives. Why, one asks? Because the Liberals want any environmental legislation to fail under Harper and the Conservatives so that they can use the issue in an election.

It just goes to show that if Canadians want a government that will do something on the environment, that they should elect the NDP, where the leader actually walks the talks and lives in a environmentally friendly home.

Venezuela's Road To Dictatorship?

It seems that Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, has gained a heck of a lot of power in recent days. It looks like Venezuela's National Assembly is going to give Chavez the power to rule by decree for 18 months, so that Chavez can make sweeping changes to the Venezuelan political system.

Now, this seems like a very strange move for a country that claims to be democratic to make. Especially since Chavez's political party, the Fifth Republic Movement controls 114 out of 167 seats in the National Assembly.

I can't see why any reforms in Venezuela could be done in the National Assembly - There is nothing to stop such a thing from happening.

This consolidation of power by Chavez makes no sense to me. It is not necessary. Unless of course, one wants to become a dictator. Remember, Hilter became all-powerful leader of Germany via legal means.

Now, I know many people who were looking at Venezuela with hope that it would become an example of socialism done right. I don't think it is going to happen.

Furthermore, I believe that we, as social democrats, democratic socialists, and democratic communists cannot support a government that is eroding the basis of democracy, no matter how much they conform to the "correct" ideology.

Therefore, I think it is time for progressive organizations that have endorsed the Hands Off Venezuela campaign to remove that endorsement as soon as possible. Why? Because they support this action of Chavez's that is attacking democracy.

I guess Lord Acton was right.

Update 1/20/2007, 7:42 pm:

Hands Off Venezuela's support for Chavez's actions, in case the link does something funny.

President Chávez: Nationalise Sanitarios Maracay!

Friday, 19 January 2007

We welcome the recent decisions of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez to ask for an Enabling Law that will allow for the renationalisation of all privatised companies.

Update: 3/15/2007, 8:00 pm

I've moved to a new location, so I would ask that you please comment there. I've turned off comments here, but I've moved all of the comments there so that context is retained.

Thanks.

Update Chaos

This is partly a test, and partly an apology.

I've been updating my blog to use the new features of Blogger "Not-So-Beta", including using labels. However, when I applied labels to my old post, it messed up my feed.

So if you have experienced any disturbances, then I'm sorry.

If this post appears on the Blogging Dippers website, then I've got things working again.