Politics

[lance_sibley]

My friendslist seems to be rather politics-heavy tonight. Not that I mind, being something of a political junkie.

1. Fox News airs footage of Sex Power God
   
   
   brendan_moody's school's Queer Alliance held a party this past Saturday night, which was infiltrated by a cameraman from Fox News. Bill O'Reilly is going apopleptic over the "debauchery" which took place there, claiming that the party was paid for by Brown University from student fees. In actual fact, the party was paid for by Queer Alliance fundraising.
   
   O'Reilly's mole referred to the party as "the wildest party [he'd] ever been to," with "guys kissing guys and girls making out with girls." God forbid that young adults should engage in sexual activity - particularly of the same-sex variety. I'm guessing that he didn't attend too many parties when he was in university, and furthermore that he wasn't in a fraternity. Now there's an interesting question - why doesn't he turn some of his umbrage on fraternities, which are tied more directly to universities and which sponsor "debauchery" on a regular basis? Let me guess... hm. Ah, here it is - "guys kissing guys and girls making out with girls." I'm surprised he didn't videotape the girls.




2. Baptists protest gay store - and this time, it wasn't even the Westboro Baptist "Church." (That's Fred Phelps' outfit, for those who aren't aware.)
   
   Apparently the right to protest now includes waving signs around that say "Fags Die, God Laughs." Three things stood out in my mind from this report:
   
   
   1. From the article: "About 25 members of the Old Paths Baptist Church protested Monday afternoon [...] Though the group has been to IU many times in the past few years, Monday's demonstration was larger than usual, complete with children playing instruments and singing songs beside the sign-wielding adults."
      
      If 25 people was the best they could do, I don't think we have a whole lot to worry about. I'm more concerned with the fact that children are being taught that it's all right to hate.
   
   
   
   2. Protestor Grady Styles said he joined in because "the gay community in Bloomington is so strong."
      
      And our strength scares them, evidently. Though this comment smacks of "mob mentality" to me. "Oh, I didn't have anything to do, and this parade came along, so I thought I'd join in as it looked like good fun and I was bored."
   
   
   
   3. This protest came less than a month after two minors stole and burned a version of the New Glory that had been hanging outside The Inner Chef's storefront. The minors admitted to stealing the flag Oct. 8 because they thought it was "unpatriotic."
      
      Hm. I'm forced to ask myself whether anything was done about this admitted act of theft. Probably not. After all, the cops only showed up to make sure that the protest "didn't get out of hand" - meaning that nobody got lynched, I guess. Burning a stolen Pride flag (or at least attempting to) counts as good clean fun.
   
   
   
3. The new face of separatism in Quebec is a cute one.
   
   Andre Boisclair has been elected leader of the Parti Quebecois. This is notable mainly because he's admitted to having used cocaine in the past while a member of the Cabinet, and yet the party was willing to look past that in an attempt to woo the youth vote by electing a man my age - he's 16 months older than I am - to the top position.
   
   This is quite interesting. Not only because he's a gay man - Quebec is notable for being much more open-minded than many jurisdictions - but because of the cocaine issue and his youth. I'm actually amazed that he won 53% of the vote on the first ballot - I expected it to take a few ballots to decide on a winner, and I honestly thought it would be someone else. I've read a number of newspaper accounts of the campaign, and I don't ever recall him putting forth any positions. Every article focused on his being criticized by his competitors over his cocaine use (except for the one article about the Press Gallery Dinner in Ottawa, at which Governor-General Michaelle Jean made wisecracks about serving "sandwiches with Coke").
   
   Now, it's quite possible that he did put forth some good ideas, and the media just chose to ignore them for the much sexier angle (no pun intended ;) ). My understanding, however, is that Premier Jean Charest is not doing too well in the current opinion polls, meaning that Boisclair could be Premier of Quebec before too long. It would be nice to know something about his positions.
   
   Interestingly, Wikipedia is right up to date on the whole thing...



4. The game of political chicken in Ottawa continues...
   
   It amazes me that the leaders of the opposition parties can claim with a straight face that they don't want to force a Christmas election, and that it will be Paul Martin's fault if we find ourselves heading to the polls on our way to our turkey dinners. Stephen Harper claims that he's not campaigning, and in fact is criticizing the Liberal government for issuing a financial statement which he claims is a thinly-disguised set of campaign promises, but according to the CBC, the Conservatives have already raised $21 million towards the expected campaign. (I love how the website puts it: "Through the first three quarters of 2005 the Conservatives received almost $11 million more than twice that raised by the Liberals who collected $5,161,813; and four times the New Democrats' $2,416,181." They make it sound like a grade 11 algebra problem.) How dare Harper criticize the Liberals for campaiging when that's exactly what he's been doing for the last few months.
   
   If an election is held over Christmas, I find it hard to believe that Canadians will magically forget who forced it. Yes, the Liberals may have acted in a corrupt fashion, although Gomery absolved Paul Martin of any blame in the sponsorship scandal. But Martin has promised to call an election by the beginning of March, after the second part of Gomery's report is issued. Harper's eagerness to gain power is scary; he can't even wait one extra month for the election that's already been promised. We're not going to forget about the scandal; other than the usual American news headlines that we're frequently inundated with, there's been nothing else in the news here for well over a year - or has it been two, or three now? It seems like it's been in the news forever.
   
   We get it. Chretien and his cronies in the Liberal Party did bad things. Martin was Chretien's Finance Minister for much of his tenure, but as Gomery pointed out, the sponsorship scandal was directed out of Chretien's office. Most of the guilty parties are out of government. Harper's not doing himself any favours when he tries to shift the blame to Martin in an attempt to gain power for himself.
   
   And - even if he does win - it's not going to be by a majority, not by a long shot. And what's he going to do? I haven't heard one good idea come from him that isn't just "we'll do the same thing the Liberals are doing, except without corruption." Which I doubt - it'll just be a different kind of corruption. Furthermore, the Liberals have announced their intention to cut taxes pretty much across the board. Our economy is good. Why punish Martin for Chretien's sins?


Wow, that was a long rant...

In other news: Boston Legal rocked tonight. Candice Bergen was amazing, and they actually gave Rene Auberjonois something to do this week (though still not enough). The relationship between Alan Shore and Denny Crane continues to progress nicely. Alan's confession that he suffers from night terrors, and his asking Denny to sleep with him to make sure that he doesn't hurt himself in the night was priceless. Denny continues to think that Alan's coming on to him.

House was good as well, though the medical mystery wasn't nearly as compelling as usual. I enjoyed seeing House go to the therapy session and get into an argument with Mark (the actor playing Mark, BTW, seems to be from Hamilton, ON), and seeing Tom Lenk as House's clinic patient was fun. (Okay, I think Tom Lenk is cute. Sue me.)

I missed much of Bones because I was trying to make dinner after the water came back, unfortunately. I'll catch it in reruns, I guess.

Comments

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

Boisclair is a little tighty-righty when it comes to public finances: he applauded that feculent Québec lucide thing the other week. He's distinctly in the Margaret Thatcher/Condoleezza Rice school of minority politicians.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

I'm actually fairly centrist on fiscal policy, preferring to see governments live within their means and without taxing the populace into poverty. So that's not necessarily a bad thing in my book.

(Admittedly, there are things I wish the government wouldn't spend money on so that they would have more money for more social spending, but I'm realistic enough to know that many of the things that the government spends money on are necessary evils.)

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

Fiscal responsibility is a good thing. In a lot of ways, though, fiscal responsibility passes by social spending: investment in one area (for example, early childhood education) can pay itself back many times over in savings in other areas (for example, prison, welfare, or health care).

Be that as it may, the Québec lucide isn't about living within anyone's means. It's about further hampering the government's ability to effectively tax the wealth on its territory - i.e. corporations - which, since the government actually does have to spend money, inevitably means an increased direct and indirect tax burden on the populace.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Fiscal responsibility is a good thing. In a lot of ways, though, fiscal responsibility passes by social spending: investment in one area (for example, early childhood education) can pay itself back many times over in savings in other areas (for example, prison, welfare, or health care).

The problem is that people don't want to suffer in the short term for long term gain that they may not be alive to see.

Be that as it may, the Québec lucide isn't about living within anyone's means. It's about further hampering the government's ability to effectively tax the wealth on its territory - i.e. corporations - which, since the government actually does have to spend money, inevitably means an increased direct and indirect tax burden on the populace.

I agree, the government does have to spend money - but I think they can be a lot smarter about how they spend it.

And even if the government does increase the tax burden on corporations, we as consumers will still end up paying at least as much as before, as the corporations will increase their prices in order to be able to afford to pay taxes.

And then, because the GST and PST are percentages, we'll pay more in sales tax than we are now on top of the higher prices.

That's assuming that the corporations don't just outsource everything to India and China, thus avoiding having to pay payroll taxes and reducing the amount of money we as consumers have to spend. Thus causing the corporations' profits to lessen, causing them to make further cutbacks, and round and round we go. It's a death spiral, IMHO.

Though I'm sure evil_admiral would have something to say here, as he's actually studying economics.

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

The Scandinavian economies that rely on corporate taxation to finance their generous (and successful) welfare states have some of the most competitive economies in the world. Simple rate of taxation is not the only determinant that corporations use in determining where to set up shop. A healthy, well-educated, peaceful, motivated, and non-criminal populace is an important determining factor, because the workers are more productive and the company needs to outlay less for training and benefits.

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

That's assuming that the corporations don't just outsource everything to India and China,


Or, worse, to Ontario and PEI...

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Well, I think we can all agree that sending jobs to PEI won't help any of us... but for you and me, I wouldn't think jobs relocating to Ontario would be a problem. ;)

Though the PQ, BQ and montrealais may beg to differ.

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

Right, was talking about Quebec's reasons for doing things.

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

Incidentally, the reason he was outed in the first place was because as minister, he cut funding to Dire Enfin la Violence, Montreal's anti-gay-bashing program and phone line, forcing them to close.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Well, that's certainly a good reason to out someone...

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

As for the Christmas election, remember: even if the opposition parties force it, it's up to Paul to choose the date. (36 days is the MINIMUM, not the maximum.) If we have an election, it's indeed the opposition's doing; if we have a Christmas election, it's entirely Paul's fault.

[mencc1701.livejournal.com]

Love the icon! Can I steal?

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

Soitenly.

[mencc1701.livejournal.com]

Thanks. :)

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Right, I keep forgetting that. And the Globe did say today that Martin was amenable to shutting down the campaign from December 23 to January 2 should the election be forced.

Though it has to be said that the electorate gets tired of long campaigns. And since this one is likely to be fought on very few issues, I suspect they'll get tired really quickly.

[dblaser-ca.livejournal.com]

Paul Martin will be in a "damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" situation if he doesn't call the election quickly.

As has already been pointed out, people don't like lengthy campaigns. They grow tired of politicians trying to call them at suppertime in the same fashion that telemarketers do.

If he delays the election, he'll be accused of stalling to stay in power as long as he possibly can.

Either way, chances are pretty good that the Liberal party is on its way out the door as the Canadian Federal Government. People aren't going to forget the sponsorship scandal.

It surely isn't going to be a Conservative majority government, because people still don't have enough faith in the Conservative party to govern the nation.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

If he delays the election, he'll be accused of stalling to stay in power as long as he possibly can.

Though he's already gone on record as saying he'll call it after the second Gomery report comes down. Do you really think he'll try delaying past that point, given that he made that promise during a televised address to the nation? That would be suicide.

Either way, chances are pretty good that the Liberal party is on its way out the door as the Canadian Federal Government. People aren't going to forget the sponsorship scandal.

No, they're not... but there's still time for Harper to stick his foot in his mouth several times. I'd be shocked if he didn't do it at least twice during the campaign.

It surely isn't going to be a Conservative majority government, because people still don't have enough faith in the Conservative party to govern the nation.

On that, I agree. I don't think I'd mind any minority, as the situation tempers what any political party can do. The Conservatives aren't going to implement a Jesus-freak agenda if they're outnumbered by the other three parties.

And I'm not sure if it's the Conservative Party that people don't trust, or the former Reform/CRAPpers, or Harper specifically. I think that a centrist conservative party (read: the old PCs) would do well. Unfortunately, the conservative movement in the Western world has been hijacked by Jesus freaks and warmongers who want to reduce taxes to as near zero as possible while still spending the same amount of money as before. (And don't get me started on health care.)

IMHO.

[dblaser-ca.livejournal.com]

Though he's already gone on record as saying he'll call it after the second Gomery report comes down. Do you really think he'll try delaying past that point, given that he made that promise during a televised address to the nation? That would be suicide.

It's the timing of that calling that will surprise people.

The Gomery Report Part 2 is due out on or about February 1st, 2006. He's stated he would call an election within 30 days after the release of that second part.

Most people are reading that as "The second report will come out and we'll have an election around 30 days later." That's not what is going to happen.

The report will come out on or about February 1st, they'll read it, digest it, sit on it, bury it in a patch of soft peat for a while, dig it up, notarize (sp?) it, lose it, find it, practice a little voo doo and wave a dead chicken over it, and then when we get close to 30 days after the report had been published, he'll call an election for 36 days later.

It'll be more like 66-70 days after the report comes out that people will be voting on it.

Why? Because, despite the fact that the entire Liberal Party has done some good things, and they're completely corrupt about other things, Paul Martin isn't quite the dummy that some would believe.

He needs to delay it as long as possible, because it gives Canadians a chance to calm down and not be reactionary about the findings.

Lets look at Gomery Report Part 1 as an example. For two weeks after it came out, people were fuming, it was in the media daily. Around the end of the second week, it started to calm down and people started to talk about it a whole lot less. In fact, it almost completely fell out of the media spotlight.

He needs that to happen again before an election is called, otherwise his proverbial goose is cooked.

No, they're not... but there's still time for Harper to stick his foot in his mouth several times. I'd be shocked if he didn't do it at least twice during the campaign.

So long as Stephen Harper doesn't start predicting that they'll win the election, he'll come out on top. That was his fatal failing last time.

The Conservatives were high in support until which time as he predicted they'd win, then they got torn down because Liberal Loyalists came running out of the woodwork to make sure it didn't happen.

If he doesn't say that, chances are pretty good for him.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Good point about the timing of the election. You're right, that could put the election into early March.

However, I highly doubt that either the media or the opposition will allow the report to disappear from public consciousness over the course of the campaign.

I saw on the news today that something like 68% of Canadians recently polled want the election in the spring, so I think that there will be some feeling of wanting to punish whomever forces it earlier.

As for Harper's comments during the last election, I think a big part of that is that Canadians don't like arrogance. Chretien was widely viewed as arrogant, but nowhere near the level of Mulroney. If Chretien were still PM, I agree that the Liberals wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Hell of even forming a minority in the next election. A lot of people view Martin as being much more genuinely self-effacing.

Remember, too, that it wasn't just Harper, but many of the Conservative candidates who had problems with foot-and-mouth disease. (Not that the Liberals are completely immune from that. Case in point: Carolyn Parrish.)

But we'll see. It should be interesting, no matter what happens. And I mean "interesting" as in the Chinese curse. ;) It wouldn't surprise me if the Liberals and the Conservatives ended up in a dead heat, with the NDP and the BQ making up the balance of power in whatever coalition gets formed.

[minotaurs.livejournal.com]

Can I come live with you? Canadian politics sound like much more fun that ours.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

It's certainly more colourful... and I had been thinking about trying to make more room in my bedroom closet... ;)

[mencc1701.livejournal.com]

Heh, when I saw the link title for number 3, I assumed that the separatists had gotten a cute, fuzzy mascot. :p

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Remember whose LJ you're reading. ;)

[mencc1701.livejournal.com]

I did, after I clicked. ;)

[plaidlibrarian.livejournal.com]

I am happy that a political party was open minded enough to select an openly gay man as a party leader. But did it really have to be a right wing, cocaine using, separatist?

[montrealais.livejournal.com]

Well, it pretty much had to be a separatist, considering which party we're talking about. :)

[cuteteenboy.livejournal.com]

I feel bad for you, having to sit through Regeneration again. I'm assuming your TV was stuck on that channel, or you were receiving it in the fillings of your teeth or something...

Did you catch the new HF?

Why no recent chatting with me?

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

I feel bad for you, having to sit through Regeneration again. I'm assuming your TV was stuck on that channel, or you were receiving it in the fillings of your teeth or something...

LOL! See current icon. ;)

Actually, I was just too lazy to get up from the computer and change the channel. ;) I wasn't actually watching it so much as having it on as background noise.

Did you catch the new HF?

Not yet, I didn't know there was a new episode up. I'll go have a look.

Why no recent chatting with me?

I don't usually open up MSN or any other chat program unless I'm actively planning to use it, like for a cybermeeting. You know you can always call me if you feel like chatting. :)