A Great Big Bruise

I'll try to keep this short and sweet. I know I have completely slaughtered the election horse to the point of entrails. However, it would just be wrong, if after all of this, I didn't write one last entry on what just happened. Canada, you got it right last night (save Atlantic Canada who reminds me of phantom limb pain). This is exactly what Canada needs – a strong Conservative minority that has a moderately secure mandate. The evangelists in the party will be muzzled and locked in their cages only to be released for parliamentary votes. All will be okay.

So here are my thoughts, expectations, and otherwise unimportant musings:

• The Liberal brass need to see that their party has moved too far left to be Canada's natural governing party. The average centrist Canadian is just no longer comfortable with their migration from common sense. A national party they are no longer.
  
• Canada needs to have a multi-partisan health care summit. I'm not talking about a bullshit photo op where all of the parties get together on a nice lake in Quebec and announce their archaic ideological views on Canada's health care system. I'm talking about a week-long melding of the minds where a combination of politicians, clinicians, and scholars can speak free of political retribution about how our current system needs to be overhauled. It's time we realize that our system is not one of the best in the world. It stinks. Canadians have to let go of the ridiculous notion that universal health care is a national symbol like Gretzky, the Maple Leaf, and Celine Dion's chest-pounding. Allow our leaders to discuss and consider meaningful change instead of politically-safe patch work. While you're at it people, take some time to read up on health care systems around the world. You will learn that a two-tier system is nothing close to American. In fact it is very much European. Oh, and it works. Our health is too important to treat the system that ensures it like a sacred cow. With criticism comes improvement.
  
• As a nation we can't complain about another minority government when we insist on having five main stream parties. It comes down to simple math.
  
• Danny Williams is a fucking buffoon.
  
• I'm glad Michael Fortier lost. Harper so screwed that up and got what he deserved.
  
• Book it. Stephane Dion is the worst leader in Liberal Party history. When contacted late last evening Paul Martin stated that he was more than happy to relinquish his title.
  
• The Green Party should not be allowed at the next debate. As refreshing as Elizabeth May was, the debate is meant for potential Prime Ministers to demonstrate their mettle, not an interview for "Smartest, Nicest Canadian."
  
• I would vote for the leader of ANY PARTY if they came out on the first day of an election campaign with the following promise:
  

  "Within one month of taking office, I will legislate a referendum in Quebec on the issue of sovereignty. The question will be clear: 'Do you want Quebec to completely separate from Canada on May 1, 2009? If yes, Quebec will be responsible for establishing their own currency, military, and network of social programs, including health care, completely independent from those of Canada. The new country of Quebec will also be responsible for their portion of Canada's national debt at that time and must purchase back all federal property within the geographic borders of the new nation. It is understood that anything greater that 50% in favour of this separation will result in its full enactment. Yes____ No____'"
  

  If "yes" wins (which it won't) we cut the cancer lose, collect our money, give federal jobs to unilinguists, and move on. If "no" wins, legislation will take effect immediately to have the Bloc disbanded as a federal party. Either way, we have our country back.
  

• Finally, look at an updated color-coded Canadian electoral map. It looks like a big, sore, bruise.
  

Why Blue Is Okay Today

I really don't think any of you care why I am voting Conservative today. I'm not that into myself to think that millions (okay tens) of people would come to my blog just to see where I placed my "x". The reason I am writing this explanation is very much a selfish one: on the off-chance that just one of you visits A Chronicle before voting today, it's satisfying to think that it may have persuaded you to be comfortable voting Conservative too. I'm really not "a Conservative." I consider myself more of a realist. A moderate. Pro-choice, pro same-sex marriage, and an atheist (wait now...I'm a left wing wack-job!). There was a time (pre-Trudeau) where the Liberal party was a very sensible one. They existed in a nice place near the fulcrum of the Canadian political teeter totter representing the moderate Canadian. Hence the title "Natural Governing Party." Over the years they have drifted farther and farther to the left and now reside close to the left seat of the teeter totter. This seat has become very crowded – shared with Jack, Ms. May, and their bleeding heart army. Mr Harper is stuck all alone on the other seat (in fact he hasn't reached the seat). You remember that kid – held in the air for hours (okay minutes) wailing like a baby while the bullies on the other end howl in insecure delight. I remember it all too well. Queen Elizabeth Park. 1982. Glace Ba.....I digress.

The Liberal's major failings, in my humble opinion, have been on issues like immigration (no, I don't hate immigrants), crime and justice (I do believe that victims have more rights than criminals), and an over-riding desire to hold the collective hands of the nation (my parents taught me not to speak to strangers). I could get into each of these issues in detail, however I don't have the time nor do I think any of you really give a shit right now (and if you do I suspect you will go to a much more credible source than this blog). I understand your concerns that The Conservative Party of Canada has some extremist, right wing, freaks embedded within. Really I do and you are right – they exist. But what you have to remember is that you live in Canada and Harper is not a dummy. Sure, he isn't a big fan of Steve and Phil getting married. I doubt he will be sitting in the front row when Dr. Morgentaler receives his Order of Canada. And if you were to ask him on a personal level, he would love to see Canada a more socially conservative place. However, he knows that most Canadians are progressive and pursuing these goals would surely be the demise of any long lasting conservative legacy. But what Mr. Dion, Jack, and the rest of the far left don't want you to know is that Mr. Harper is also very much a libertarian. He despises the thought of government getting involved in the personal affairs of Canadians. If one was to research the founding platform of the Reform Party (Preston's Church Club), they would discover that Mr. Harper stood up to have any stance on same sex marriage and abortion left out of the party platform. He took a strong stance (and lost) that these issues were not meant to be a part of parliamentary debate. I know what you are thinking: If he is so reasonable, why did he table a bill against same sex marriage shortly after taking office? Good question. Easy answer. Think about it. He had the far right ideologues (see, I'm fair) in his caucus (I still laugh like a ten-year-old at this word) wanting the issue brought to parliament. He didn't feel it was the government's position to deal with it – remember, libertarian. So he decided to table it while he had a weak minority. His neoconservative supporters would be satisfied and in the end the bill would easily lose. Good night.

So here is my plan and maybe you might make it yours too. Vote conservative. Their platform is not radical and to be quite honest, Harper really is the safest choice in a rough economic storm – without question. He will win another minority. There is no chance that a majority government is anything close to possible. A Conservative win will surely be the end of Stephane "can you repeat that" Dion. The Liberals will hold another leadership convention and will have learned a lesson: let's try choosing a leader this time and see how that works out. Harper's minority government will be "supervised" by the checks and balances of our Parliamentary system (Jack's job) and much to the surprise of our left wing Chicken Littles, the sky will not fall. In a short time, when the Liberals' ducks are strategically arranged, they will pull the box out from under the Conservatives feet and low and behold: another election. I know having to digest another six weeks of begging stinks. However, that election, I pray to my atheist gods, will provide us with a real choice. Consider it long-term strategic voting.

In any event, get out and vote (any colour) and enjoy a day that represents your freedom. It really is a wonderful thing.

Intoxicated Truth

I love it when a normally reserved person gets a little too into the sauce and reveals his inner asshole. You know the scenario, the guy crosses the threshold into intoxication and basically everyone and their mother becomes fair game. He may tell you that he wants to sleep with your wife. Or maybe he snaps on the waitress who forgot to split the bill calling her a stupid "git" (picture you are in London for this one). Sometimes the guy is a "good drunk" and tells you that he loves you and has already slept with your wife. Anyway, you get the point: people are honest when they are pickled. You want to see a person's true blueprint? Buy them drinks and initiate a targeted conversation. Three hours later you've got the goods.

So I have an idea. Drunken debates should be mandated during an election campaign. Just one per election is all we would need. It makes perfect sense. We all know they're lying to us. Jack Layton knows he would have to tax us to the point of food stamps to follow through on all the promises he assumes he'll never have to act on. Deep inside Stephan Dion knows that he took advantage of a ridiculously illogical nomination system (thanks Gerard). And south of the border, Barrack Obama really does think that his wife was right – they have never really been proud of their country – and never will unless he wins.

Here's my proposal. The leaders go out for free wings and beer 90 minutes prior to the debate (I would be willing to pay for this as a tax payer and yes Jack, you can have wine coolers). This should get them perfectly to that point of being linguistically fluid (hell we may even understand Mr. Dion) yet disinhibited and willing to let the shit really fly. The glass of water on their podium will be replaced by an alcoholic beverage of their choice, refilled as necessary. This will ensure that they progressively get more drunk and by the end of the night, downright gross. This serves the purpose of allowing the voter to identify who can hold their liquor best. As the leader of a G8 country (exactly how many "G" countries are there now – I think it's up to like G16) a Prime Minister/President is required to make monumental decisions while schmoozing with other G? leaders. Essentially, who has the best judgment while trashed?

So, with this new model of intoxicated debate in mind I have compiled what I think we would see if my ingenious idea came to fermented fruition.

Elizabeth May would admit she has never recycled in her life.

Barrack Obama would state, "Sure I don't have the experience. But I'm just so much smarter than the rest of you."

Stephan Dion would admit that this is the first time he has ever drunk and then explain to everyone that "drunk" not "drank" is the correct past tense of drink.

Joe Biden would turn to Sarah Palin and say, "Pronounce your g's you dumb bitch. Oh, and nice jugs by the way."

Jack Layton would fire up a joint then admit that marijuana is in fact a "gateway drug" stating, "how do you think I got into heroin?"

Sarah Palin would take her top off. Then start reciting Deuteronomy.

Gilles Duceppe would admit that his master plan includes hunting down Jean Chretien in the caves of northern Quebec and catching him dead or alive.

John McCain would admit that he has stolen the logo from McCain fries and also that he chose Palin because she's a MILF.

Steven Harper would confess that he has homoerotic dreams involving Jack Layton.

In the end, I think we would all have a much easier time making a choice and voter turnout would hit historic highs. You can't say I'm wrong can you?

Election Spin and Brain Anatomy

Here's one of the reasons I could never be a politician (or is this a reason I could be?): I break promises. I said I would refrain from political entries for the next week at least. Well, sorry but I couldn't help it.

I really have no issue with people voting Liberal. Honestly (and I'm not lying this time). If you decide to vote Liberal, good on ya. They have some very appealing positions and policies. I would like to be able to vote for them and I am sure some day I will again. However, please don't vote for them because of their latest slew of attack ads on Stephen Harper, characterizing him as a George Bush wannabe. Please, realize that you are smarter than this horse shit. "Brotherizing" Harper and Bush has become very in vogue (en vogue in Quebec) amongst the Canadian left wing ideologues these days. I was thinking it was something in the Starbucks Latte, however if this was the case I would be under the same spell. Open any newspaper to the editorial section and you will find myriad articles recycling the same theme on a different day. It really has gotten old for those of us able to fire up the critical analysis portion of our brain (the frontal lobe if I'm not mistaken). Sure Mr. Harper is right of center. Someone in this country has to try to average the "net compass position" towards the center. Without him Canada's collective "square" would fall off the bottom left corner of the graph for Christ's sake (if confused read blog entry titled, "Find Your Square and be Proud.") But Mr. Harper's position right of center does not automatically equate the guy, and his party, to Mr. Sarah Palin.

There is an excellent article in Saturday's Ottawa Citizen written by Dan Gardner. Here is the link:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/columnists/story.html?id=0af97da6-b4bb-4d21-992f-2f9d688ff8f1

The article provides readers with several points, both ideological theory and legislative fact, which prove that when one uses their cognitive capacities, the link between George Bush and Stephen Harper gets more and more tenuous. The fact of the matter is this: Mr. Harper and the Conservatives are closer to Mr. Bush and the Republicans than any of the other mainstream leaders or parties in Canada. Both of my cats have realized this. But to allow your brain to blindly accept Dion's claims (if you are able to understand him of course) that Mr. Harper is a Bush clone would be a lazy, uncritical conclusion. If compared to our current prime ministerial candidates, Barrack Obama, who I think is going to be a fantastic president if given the chance, would fall not all that far from Mr. Harper in terms of ideology and current platforms. The Democratic Party of America, would no doubt be considered right of center comparatively in Canada. Does this make Obama and his party Bush wannabe's? Hardly. Use your brains people. Separate fact from left wing shepherding. Don't land in the herd. Instead, use your frontal lobe.