Sleep all You Want, But Don't Cut!

Well the story says it all for itself. A Conservative MP sleeps at a committee session on veterans. Now before you bash the Conservative sleeping and saying that he doesn't care about veterans I think it is important to know that we have all sleepy moments. I just last Friday night slept way too early and forgot to post something on the blog for Yesterday. It doesn't mean I don't care about my readers.Now the MP denies the claim that he slept  and quite honestly I don't care. The fact that are media continues to talk about pointless topics is really getting on my nerves. I mean even if he did sleep in the committee so what? He may have been tired or worked to late the night before. The point is we don't know so don't judge. But what I do know is the conservative party has done questionable acts against our veterans. They have proposed budget cuts to veterans affairs which created protest all over the country. So Sleeping in parliament doesn't mean you don't support veterans, but we will see what Rob Anders really thinks in the spring budget. If the spring budget includes cuts to veterans benefits and Rob votes for it then we will know for sure what support he has for our veterans.

Read more here

Harper: Not My Problem!

Harper may have a majority in the Canadian house of commons, but in the provincial legislatures (or National assembly in Quebec) people elected different people in government. Yet Harper is going to push down 137 million dollars in cost down the provinces budget for parole and persecution. While the Federal government would only have to pay an extra 9.7 million in parole and persecution. If Harper wants to waste money he can do that, but the provinces shouldn't be forced to pay money that they legislature of the province don't agree with. Harper likes control and he is trying to control our provinces!

The PBO attempts to calculate how government costs would be different if the measure was in place for the 2008-09 fiscal year. It concludes Ottawa would be on the hook for $7.9-million more in prosecution and parole review costs, while the provinces would face $137-million for higher prosecution, court, prison and parole review costs.

This is only part of the bill other parts of the bill will force our provinces to waste million more on prisons. Just because Harper doesn't want to spend money on this wasteful piece of legislation doesn't mean he should have the right to take control of the priority of the provinces budget. 

However the PBO report cautions this analysis only covers one aspect of one part of Bill C-10 and does not include potential capital costs such as building new prisons. Bill C-10, the “Safe Streets and Communities Act,” is an omnibus bill that brings together nine previously separate pieces of legislation that had been introduced but not passed before the last election.

 Read More here

Election Tampering! MAYBE!

Elections can get ugly and in the last election it was apparently especially ugly. With constant amount of evidence showing that people in many ridings were called to lie about a polling station change. If it can be proven that enough people were disenfranchised from voting in a riding there can be by-election. Now I can't say that all the allegations are true, because I always maintain the "innocent till proven guilty" approach, but I think that if it can be proven and if enough By elections are held it can be possible that the Conservatives will lose seats.

there are enough ridings that it could be possible (important word possible) that the Conservatives if by-elections are called could lose the 12 or more seats which would mean Harper would lose his majority. Now this is very out there and I won't hold my breath for this to happen, but even with the odds very low I still think it is entirely possible that Harper could lose some seats. 

Spending Billions On........

Peter Mckay affirmed that his government will buy the F-35 fighter jets. Peter Mckay stated that his government won't spend a penny more then they are suppose to. We are of course suppose to trust this, even though the cost of the fighter jets went from 18 billion to 30 billion (a 12 billion dollar difference, Hey that enough money to completely fund a national child care program). But my favorite line of his speech is this one.

"And we will give our air men and women the best available aircraft, which I believe is the fifth-generation, F-35 Lightning II."

And to that I show this video of Rick Mercer explaining the falsehood of that statement.

 So we are wasting 30 billion on these fighter jets when we could be using the money to actually make the Canadian economy stronger, our health care system better, tuition fees lower!

Read more here

Republicans No Fiscal Conservatives

According to the independent committee for responsible federal budget most Republican candidates aren't at all fiscally responsible. In fact 3 out of the 4 Republicans would increase the debt over the next ten years.

The worst on the budget is Newt Gingrich according to the report he would increase the debt by 7 trillion in nine years and make the Debt to GDP ratio 114%. Rick Santorum wins second place on the worst fiscal conservative by adding 4 trillion to the debt in nine years bringing the Debt to GDP to 104%. Mitt Romney had some credibility, because his old plan would have increase the debt by only 250 billion in nine years, that on average 28 billion a year. that way below the current projection of a 500-600 billion dollar deficit per year, but most recently if you add Romney new tax plan he just talked about a few days ago he would add 2.5 trillion to the debt in nine years. He's kind of like Harper promise a small deficit first then show up with a bigger deficit. But the best plan (at least for the deficit) would be Ron Paul his plan according to the study would reduce 2.2 trillion in debt over 9 years. The only problem, rather one of the problems with Ron Paul's plan is the fact that in the process of eliminating a bunch of government agencies and some economist say eliminate up to 1.5 million jobs in the process. All of these Republicans would cut spending on essential programs for the poor and the elderly and all of them would then take that money and reduce taxes on the rich who don't need anymore money and some to the middle class. Even with small tax cuts for the middle class they would still be worse off, because a lot of the agencies that help them would be cut harsh like Medicare or even be completely dismantled.

Mitt, Rick and Newt are lying when they call themselves fiscally responsible, and Ron although would cut defense his other policies would take the U.S back into recession. In fact all these candidates would put the middle class and the poor back into recession.   

Read More Here