theleftcoast.ca

What is the name of those new jets the Harper Conservatives are purchasing? Are they the same as the F-35s as described in the following article?

The United States is making a gigantic investment in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, billed by its advocates as the next — by their count the fifth — generation of air-to-air and air-to-ground combat aircraft. Claimed to be near invisible to radar and able to dominate any future battlefield, the F-35 will replace most of the air-combat aircraft in the inventories of the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and at least nine foreign allies, and it will be in those inventories for the next 55 years. It’s no secret, however, that the program — the most expensive in American history — is a calamity.

To read the rest of this very interesting article, visit the Foreign Policy.

The Voice on CBC Radio this morning commented on a recent poll that found that a significant majority of Canadians oppose corporate tax cuts and the Harper government’s planned purchase of F-35 fighter jets.

The Voice added that the same majority of people neglected to vote in the recent federal election. The recent election that saw a Stephen Harper majority government elected. Sigh.

In an April 12 interview with the Maple Ridge News, Randy Kamp was asked:

“What have you done in the past three years to make you a good Member of Parliament?”

He replied;

“I guess the most notable thing is that I have been the MP. Of all the candidates, I’m the only one who has that on my resume.”

To be fair, Mr. Kamp elaborated that his accomplishments also included working hard, thinking carefully, and treating everyone with respect, along with “other duties”. Of course, such impressive bona fides are hardly unique to incumbent MPs.

So, does Randy Kamp have any actual plans for the voters in Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Mission that extend beyond his own re-election?

Here is a link to more of the Maple Ridge News Randy Kamp interview.

It appears that the example set by Conservative candidate John Weston (Let us know if you are a Weston fan, YES or NO so we can take you off our contact list if you aren’t) is catching on with all Conservative Party events. However, the Conservative’s behaviour is more than a little troubling when you consider that the latest people to get evicted from a Conservative Party event were two teenagers simply trying to learn more about Harper and his Cons.

Justin Kaiser and Diamond Isinger, two young people who made the effort to pre-register for the Stephen Harper event in Burnaby, were denied entrance by Conservative operatives because they were too close to the Liberal party.  Kaiser says that he was saddened by the Conservatives’ singling out of Isinger, a 17 year old grade 12 student.

“If the paranoia is now so deep that 17 year olds are being kicked out of Stephen Harper events for not being Conservatives, it is deeply disturbing, and a little weird.  It’s not like she was denying the fact that she is a Liberal supporter when they asked.  I mean isn’t this what democracy is supposed to be about?”

The incident took place after Andrew McVie, a Conservative party operative, recognized Isinger as a Liberal supporter and instructed security to deny her entrance.  Kaiser, a 19 year old who has recently moved to BC from Halifax, says that he was personally angered by the incident.

“We are both Liberal supporters – but had no buttons or anything else that would have disrupted the event.  We are both young people with an interest in politics, and we wanted to check out a Conservative event.  When 17 and 19 year olds are considered threats by the governing party, then I think our country is in deep trouble.”

You have to wonder if one of the five questions a day that Harper will allow the media to ask him will have anything to do with the eviction of these two teenagers.

There is an interesting exchange taking place between the Conservative and Liberal candidates in the riding of Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam.

It all started when someone on the Liberal team found an article titled “The Flip Side of Abortion Extremism” written by James Moore, the Conservative candidate in Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam. The article was published in 1999 in the UNBC student newspaper, Over the Edge. In that article Moore describes Canada as a country of “political timidity” with “a crippled democratic impulse”. But the real shocker is how Mr. Moore mocks the well-being of a pregnant woman as a legitimate reason for abortion and suggests that:

“ …a woman could legally argue that that her well-being could be self-defined as perhaps not wanting to gain weight, or not wanting to lose the use of a wardrobe.”

James Moore in the UNBC student newspaper, Over the Edge

Stewart McGillivray the Liberal seeking election in Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam asked James Moore to clarify where he really stands on the abortion issue. He added that silence is not an option in the light of such shocking extremism.

And by way of an explanation came these comments by James Moore;

“If there’s a story tonight, tomorrow I’m going to send out a press release saying that the Liberal candidate in my riding has cheated on all of his exams,” he said. “I look forward to CTV getting a reaction from him.”

The Honourable James Moore, MP for Port Moody-Coquitlam-Port Coquitlam,

To which Stewart McGillivray replied in a letter to James Moore;

I am writing in regards to your comments on April 15.  Threatening a campaign of misinformation is beyond the pale for a Minister of the Crown.

Your party has effectively launched a crusade against youth engagement during this campaign, by vetting young participants on Facebook and attempting to literally steal youth votes at the University of Guelph.  Publicly threatening a youth who dares to engage in democracy and run for office is consistent with your party’s governing morality, but enraging nonetheless.

Issuing threats against an opponent rather than taking responsibility for one’s words and actions is not leadership.  Attempting to deter youth engagement with intimidation is not what Canadian democracy is about.  Though I am new to politics, lashing out at those whose views do not run parallel to your own does not seem to lie within the bounds of acceptable political discourse.  I seek, but do not expect, an apology for your petty and misdirected comments, and for your attempt to undercut youth involvement.  I do, however, demand that you retract your apparent threat against my academic reputation.

Sincerely,

Stewart McGillivray

Should be fun to see how this plays out. Will Moore apologize? Stay tuned!

No sooner had Jack Layton unveiled the NDP election platform than the Liberals were responding to it. There was a media opportunity put together where former NDP premier of BC and now federal Liberal, Ujjal Dosanjh spoke about the need for the “progressive voters” to unite under the big red tent of the Liberal Party of Canada.

In the press conference Dosanjh doggedly stuck to his message; progressive voters must unite to stop Harper; “The only realistic alternative to a Harper Conservative government is the Liberal big red tent.”

At the same time Dosanjh admitted that the NDP platform is a good platform but he was not interested in getting into “an NDP-bashing tirade” (been there, done that, learned that lesson). He came back to his core message; progressive voters must unite in the big red tent. And, if progressives do not unite under the big red tent then the Layton promise of 100 days of action will become a period of missed action.

Interesting that Harper held up the specter of a “reckless coalition” as the ultimate frightening bogeyman that Canadians need to fear and now the Ignatieff Liberals are holding up their own bogeyman; the Harper Conservatives with a majority government.

Today I am posing a couple of theoretical questions out there for people to think about and comment on, if you so wish. Here it is; if you lived in a federal riding that had a strong NDP MP who is seeking re-election, a less strong Conservative candidate challenging and a total chump for a Liberal candidate and you were traditionally a Liberal voter, what would you do?

Or change it around a little; you are a lifelong New Democrat who has moved into a riding that is held by strong Liberal MP who is seeking re-election. There is a strong Conservative candidate challenging the Liberal but there really is only a snowball’s chance in hell that the NDP is going to elected. What do you do in this situation, short of moving.

Anyone care to comment?

More bad news on the Harper Conservatives’ ridiculous decision to purchase through an untendered, no-competition bidding process the single engine F-35 jets. The following piece is excerpted from a CBC Politics page piece. To read the complete story, visit the CBC. It is worth a read.

Winslow Wheeler, of the Centre for Defence Information in Washington, told a press conference on Parliament Hill that “nobody on this earth” is going to end up paying $75 million per jet by the time the planes, currently in production, are fully tested and developed. The cost will be more in the neighbourhood of $148 million, he said.

The Conservative government and Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page have conflicting estimates on the program’s cost, and the Liberals say if elected, they would pull out of the memorandum of understanding signed by the Conservatives. They say a competitive bid should be held instead to replace the aging CF-18 fighter jet fleet.

“This airplane is nothing to write home about,” said Wheeler, who was speaking later Tuesday morning at an event organized by an Ottawa think tank, the Rideau Institute. He cast doubt on the capabilities of the F-35 and said even if they do end up being “as advertised” when it’s finally finished, the model is still “a gigantic performance disappointment.”

“You’re getting an underperforming airplane for a huge amount of money,” he said.

Stephen Harper’s only policy announcement on Sunday was his phantom promise to double the child sport tax credit, some years down the road, when his deficit has been eliminated. (For the record, the last time the federal deficit was eliminated was after the Mulroney/Kim Campbell Conservative government was defeated and Paul Martin was the Minister of Finance in the Jean Chretien Liberal government.)

Joyce Murray, until recently a Liberal MP and Official Opposition Sport Critic said, “Providing extra support to help families keep their children fit and active ought to be a priority for any government … but instead of helping low-income families who can’t afford to enrol their kids in sports programs, Harper’s non-refundable tax credit only increases the inequality. It is only available to families with taxable income and the means to cover their up-front costs, but it bypasses those who need it the most.”

The facts are that a departmental budget analysis shows the Conservatives’ child sport tax credit is claimed by families whose income is on average 25% higher than the Canadian family average.

Stephen Harper’s announcement means eventually doubling the $100 million of taxpayer money handed each year to parents who already enrol their kids in sports. These are the families that can already afford to enrol their kids in sports while making sure the low-income family’s kids continue to be kept out of the game.

The really tragic part of this announcement is that sports researchers confirm there is little or no reduction in obesity or health benefit to society achieved by this policy, since it results in no significant increase in sport participation.

Dona Cadman, Surrey North Conservative was asked why she broke her promise to vote against the HST in Parliament. In a conversation with Ian Bailey of the Globe and Mail Cadman stated that, “I wanted to show my support for my constituents, but I could not see standing up and voting outwardly no to my party. It would be like poking them in the eye with a stick so I felt that not being there showed that I was for the vote.”