A couple of years ago, it were referendums in France and the Netherlands that derailed a draft constitution for the European Union. Now, another country has the potential of stopping the whole process over again, in regards to a revised text for a union treaty, in this case the Treaty of Lisbon. That country is -- the Republic of Ireland.
It could be a very close vote, with the "No" side having picked up a lot of momentum the last week or so. It is rather interesting though, that a country with about a quarter of the population of the Dutch and that like the Dutch and the French uses the Euro currency could derail the whole process and send the 27 presidents and prime ministers back to the drawing board.
I'm not sure about all the issues, but I do find it interesting that people do want to hold on to whatever sovereignty they may have left; that they are not just a star on someone else's flag. The EU has been overall a remarkable success story, one of the greatest of the last century and continues to be so in this century; but somewhere one of the founding principles of the Union in 1957 of subsidiarity -- that decision making should be wherever possible be done close to the people -- was lost long ago.
A no vote might also be a big morale boost to those in the UK who also oppose further integration, in particular with the Euro. Interesting since the financial district in London for all intents and purposes operates with the Euro and not pounds sterling for 90% of transactions.
While adopting the Euro might make sense for the UK in the long run (especially since the bulk of its trade is now with Europe and not the Commonwealth), I suspect that a referendum on the issue (which has been promised at some undefined point in the future) would be excruciatingly close and would definitely be voted down in Scotland and Northern Ireland where banks print their own bills (really promissory notes tied to the sterling) since such would not be possible in the Eurozone and only one set of coins could be minted representing the whole of the UK and not separate ones for its constituents parts.
The main thing though is that people in only one country this time around, just one, are being asked their opinion; unlike the other 26 where there is merely a ratification vote in the respective national parliaments. What is so wrong with putting a treaty of such scope to the people? Take the Euro, for example. It's proven mostly successful but I don't remember the French or the Italians or the Belgians being asked their opinion about abandoning their currencies. There is still strong sentimental attachment to the Deutschemark in Germany and the Lira in Italy for obvious reasons. And there's something lost in the Gorda lottery in Spain every year when the kids are singing songs about the prizes in Euros and not pesetas.
The Irish were and they said yes; the Danes and Swedes were at different points in time and they said no for the time being. There's something wrong that people in most of the other countries were not asked about giving up one of the ultimately expressions of national sovereignty, money. The same applies about ceding further power to a bunch of commissars in Brussels. Let the people, not just their representatives, decide on this one.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
When is sorry enough?
Later today, PMS will offer a formal apology for the abuse inflicted upon thousands of Aboriginal Canadians who went through the rightfully discredited residential school system. This for Canada is no less significant than the apology offered to the natives in Australia a few months ago for being dispossessed of their lands and similar abuses. One can only hope that this is a truly sincere apology and that it moves us forward and not back.
This should have been done years ago, when the true nature of the abuse became known to the wider Canadian community. The system was terrible for non-native orphans who were forced into a similar and parallel gulag, also run by the country's churches, and in no way should that ever be minimized either. It brought shame to the religious community, in particular the Roman Catholic Church to which I belong.
Coming as the revelations did during the late 1980s to early 1990s, I know that it had a decimating effect not just on the victims who were ignored by church officials who as their US colleagues had been doing (though it was not revealed until a decade later) been moving priests and nuns around to ensure they evaded prosecution; but a similar effect on enrollments at monasteries and divinity schools. There had been a general downward trend since Vatican II, but the revelations drove away many would be applicants who did not want to be tarred with the brush of being called a child molester -- they did not want to be accused of guilt by association.
Who could blame them? I was one of those dissuaded. And I like many other Catholics are furious that the Vatican City has given those who gave blind consent to the worst kind of abuse immunity from prosecution -- not the least of them the former archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts Cardinal Bernard Law who is now in an administrative post at the Holy See; just one reason why the late Pope John Paul II should not even be considered for sainthood, let alone put on the fast track for it.
But in some respects, there was a qualitative and quantitative difference when it came to natives. Since non-natives usually had the same culture as those teaching them their souls were not always implicated. For natives, however, having the double whammy of being abused and being told they were getting it because "they didn't have a soul" was the ultimate insult. Further as wards of the state, they did not necessarily have access to the same kinds of supports offered by provincial social services agencies since they were outside the jurisdiction of the provinces.
In this respect, compensation which began to be paid out last year was well justified, although in my opinion it would have been better to allocate the reparations as a top-up to monthly federal entitlements such as the Child Tax Benefit (for the relatively younger victims) or the Guaranteed Income Supplement (for seniors) and paid out for life with a guaranteed lump sum for the unexhausted portion of the annuity upon death to the victim's descendants. The stories of natives who don't know what to do with such a large one time amount of money is equally depressing.
Be that as it may, it does go back however to the point that not all those who were at the teaching and administrative end of the system were guilty of abuse. Many, indeed probably most, did not. I know for a fact at least one of my teachers -- a nun, from 7th grade -- was at one time previous to that assigned to a reserve in Northwestern Ontario. She said as much, and in fact was an early supporter of native sovereignty for Canada's Aboriginals, similar to the arrangement in the US where many federal and state laws don't always apply to reserves unless the tribal councils assent to them. There was nothing in her character that would have suggested she would have contributed to such abuse; in fact the code of conduct for her order had zero tolerance for that.
So, I do worry about those who were and continue to be wrongly accused.
The forthcoming Truth and Reconciliation Commission needs to offer a chance to heal, but it also needs to focus on the truth and ensure those who have been wrongly accused have a chance to vindicate themselves. I am concerned, though, that unlike other TRCs (most famously the one in South Africa) there is also no immunity (limited or blanket) being offered for those who are truthful about their victimization. It's not that abusers should not be held accountable; of course, they should. But, while there is no statute of limitations in Canada there is also a concern that those who did such things will not see a need to even testify; after all, many of the older generation still think they did nothing wrong and that the attempted literal and cultural genocide of Aboriginals to which they contributed was entirely justified. Thus the TRC here may only wind up getting half the story.
My bottom line on this: What happened constituted a complete lack of the imagination and was a gross misuse of power. It deprived not only natives of their dignity, but also non-natives access to information of a quality of life that had existed undisturbed for generations and in some ways superior to others including peace of mind and self-sustenance. Access to health and social care is a right that all Canadians should have; but I often wonder if Aboriginals in tepees and igloos were and are better off than in the artificial environments we shoved upon them. Not that they should not be encouraged to contribute in full to our society; but we're too eager to offer solutions to their social isolation as well as their high rates of crime and substance abuse, rather than offering them the chance to try bottom up solutions.
The healing has to begin somewhere, and I say better late than never -- but again, this apology should have been issued in the 1980s when most of the victims were still alive.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
This should have been done years ago, when the true nature of the abuse became known to the wider Canadian community. The system was terrible for non-native orphans who were forced into a similar and parallel gulag, also run by the country's churches, and in no way should that ever be minimized either. It brought shame to the religious community, in particular the Roman Catholic Church to which I belong.
Coming as the revelations did during the late 1980s to early 1990s, I know that it had a decimating effect not just on the victims who were ignored by church officials who as their US colleagues had been doing (though it was not revealed until a decade later) been moving priests and nuns around to ensure they evaded prosecution; but a similar effect on enrollments at monasteries and divinity schools. There had been a general downward trend since Vatican II, but the revelations drove away many would be applicants who did not want to be tarred with the brush of being called a child molester -- they did not want to be accused of guilt by association.
Who could blame them? I was one of those dissuaded. And I like many other Catholics are furious that the Vatican City has given those who gave blind consent to the worst kind of abuse immunity from prosecution -- not the least of them the former archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts Cardinal Bernard Law who is now in an administrative post at the Holy See; just one reason why the late Pope John Paul II should not even be considered for sainthood, let alone put on the fast track for it.
But in some respects, there was a qualitative and quantitative difference when it came to natives. Since non-natives usually had the same culture as those teaching them their souls were not always implicated. For natives, however, having the double whammy of being abused and being told they were getting it because "they didn't have a soul" was the ultimate insult. Further as wards of the state, they did not necessarily have access to the same kinds of supports offered by provincial social services agencies since they were outside the jurisdiction of the provinces.
In this respect, compensation which began to be paid out last year was well justified, although in my opinion it would have been better to allocate the reparations as a top-up to monthly federal entitlements such as the Child Tax Benefit (for the relatively younger victims) or the Guaranteed Income Supplement (for seniors) and paid out for life with a guaranteed lump sum for the unexhausted portion of the annuity upon death to the victim's descendants. The stories of natives who don't know what to do with such a large one time amount of money is equally depressing.
Be that as it may, it does go back however to the point that not all those who were at the teaching and administrative end of the system were guilty of abuse. Many, indeed probably most, did not. I know for a fact at least one of my teachers -- a nun, from 7th grade -- was at one time previous to that assigned to a reserve in Northwestern Ontario. She said as much, and in fact was an early supporter of native sovereignty for Canada's Aboriginals, similar to the arrangement in the US where many federal and state laws don't always apply to reserves unless the tribal councils assent to them. There was nothing in her character that would have suggested she would have contributed to such abuse; in fact the code of conduct for her order had zero tolerance for that.
So, I do worry about those who were and continue to be wrongly accused.
The forthcoming Truth and Reconciliation Commission needs to offer a chance to heal, but it also needs to focus on the truth and ensure those who have been wrongly accused have a chance to vindicate themselves. I am concerned, though, that unlike other TRCs (most famously the one in South Africa) there is also no immunity (limited or blanket) being offered for those who are truthful about their victimization. It's not that abusers should not be held accountable; of course, they should. But, while there is no statute of limitations in Canada there is also a concern that those who did such things will not see a need to even testify; after all, many of the older generation still think they did nothing wrong and that the attempted literal and cultural genocide of Aboriginals to which they contributed was entirely justified. Thus the TRC here may only wind up getting half the story.
My bottom line on this: What happened constituted a complete lack of the imagination and was a gross misuse of power. It deprived not only natives of their dignity, but also non-natives access to information of a quality of life that had existed undisturbed for generations and in some ways superior to others including peace of mind and self-sustenance. Access to health and social care is a right that all Canadians should have; but I often wonder if Aboriginals in tepees and igloos were and are better off than in the artificial environments we shoved upon them. Not that they should not be encouraged to contribute in full to our society; but we're too eager to offer solutions to their social isolation as well as their high rates of crime and substance abuse, rather than offering them the chance to try bottom up solutions.
The healing has to begin somewhere, and I say better late than never -- but again, this apology should have been issued in the 1980s when most of the victims were still alive.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Welcome to Circus!
The RCMP admitted late today that Julie Couillard, the ex-girfriend of Maxime Bernier, was known to them ... but wouldn't get any more specific than that since the investigation (if there is one) is ongoing.
In other testimony to the House Ethics Committee, former spy Michel Juneau-Katsuya, one of Canada's best known critics of our national security situation, suggested that PMS is applying a double standard; saying that bureaucrats in the permanent service are held to a much higher standard than Cabinet ministers.
Big. Effing. Surprise. To no one's surprise, Harper has kept resisting demands for an independent police investigation, that an internal probe is enough. Why? Is it possible that Harper knows something about this that he doesn't want Canadians to know and thus can determine the terms of reference for the investigation?
When Martin replaced Chrétien as PM, he hired a special prosecutor to investigate Sponsorgate. Filegate, which may be less odious but still constitutes a serious breach of our national security demands no less. No one can or should feel safe if military secrets are leaked not once but twice in the course of just a few months.
As for Harper's assertion he won't participate in a "partisan circus" -- well, his cronies were the ones who created it in the first place, not the opposition. Let him try to defy a sub poena.
Oh, one last thing -- Couillard attended a $1000 per plate dinner in honour of Harper last year. The cheque bounced. She later claimed she was offered a chance to be a candidate for the party. Anyone find that just a bit suspicious?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
In other testimony to the House Ethics Committee, former spy Michel Juneau-Katsuya, one of Canada's best known critics of our national security situation, suggested that PMS is applying a double standard; saying that bureaucrats in the permanent service are held to a much higher standard than Cabinet ministers.
Big. Effing. Surprise. To no one's surprise, Harper has kept resisting demands for an independent police investigation, that an internal probe is enough. Why? Is it possible that Harper knows something about this that he doesn't want Canadians to know and thus can determine the terms of reference for the investigation?
When Martin replaced Chrétien as PM, he hired a special prosecutor to investigate Sponsorgate. Filegate, which may be less odious but still constitutes a serious breach of our national security demands no less. No one can or should feel safe if military secrets are leaked not once but twice in the course of just a few months.
As for Harper's assertion he won't participate in a "partisan circus" -- well, his cronies were the ones who created it in the first place, not the opposition. Let him try to defy a sub poena.
Oh, one last thing -- Couillard attended a $1000 per plate dinner in honour of Harper last year. The cheque bounced. She later claimed she was offered a chance to be a candidate for the party. Anyone find that just a bit suspicious?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Trouble for King Coal -- in coal country
With all the ads from the self proclaimed "clean coal" lobby running ad nauseum on TV, I had to snicker at this article in the NYT today about a county in eastern Pennsylvania where coal seams run all over the place. In order to save money in the increasingly volatile energy marketplace they are actually considering switching from coal to natural gas. While methane is actually more expensive per unit, the cost savings would come from the maintenance in boilers -- it's much less expensive to operate a gas heater than a coal one.
It's somewhat controversial for those who rely on the coal industry, especially as the cost of anthracite has doubled over the last few years. Coal also has a sentimental value in the region for obvious reasons. But the bid being put forward by the gas interest includes energy efficient lighting and upgrades to the county phone system. For a cash-strapped region, $15 million in savings is a lot of money.
Interestingly, Clinton had her largest percentage vote in the Keystone State in and around this region. Long ago, she sold her soul to King Coal -- and she was rewarded with votes. The claims she "appealed" to the working class is bunk; she knew where her bread was buttered and the people in the region expressed their gratitude accordingly. An ideology right out of the era of the machines which we thought ended in the 1930s.
From a Canadian perspective, we're seeing serious talk about the revival of coal mines long mothballed because of their polluting nature -- because of the increasing demands for power and the lack of support for alternatives in part because of NIMBY. Again, the earliest we can expect "clean coal," presuming it can be made to work (a big if) is 2020 which is when the next round of emission targets are supposed to be met; and we have a government quite content to continue to pollute to the heavens and beyond while reducing "intensity" while increasing actual outputs of carcinogens and other disease causing elements.
Not that the people at the permanent public service in Ottawa -- particularly Public Works -- are entirely innocent on this one either. Here in Hamilton, there's a co-generation plant downtown that operates using steam diverted by pipeline from the steel and chemical plants. Literally, free or very low cost heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. Guess which building is not plugged into the network? Yup -- the brand new federal offices; while older office buildings agreed to be connected. They'd rather be powered by the huge coal plant in Nanticoke; which is scheduled for shutdown in a few years but is still running at full speed especially in the current heatwave making smog even worse. Oddly enough, the former federal offices (scheduled to be converted into a hotel or lofts) ran on solar power. There isn't even a windmill on top of the new building.
Hypocrites. Both federally and provincially.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
It's somewhat controversial for those who rely on the coal industry, especially as the cost of anthracite has doubled over the last few years. Coal also has a sentimental value in the region for obvious reasons. But the bid being put forward by the gas interest includes energy efficient lighting and upgrades to the county phone system. For a cash-strapped region, $15 million in savings is a lot of money.
Interestingly, Clinton had her largest percentage vote in the Keystone State in and around this region. Long ago, she sold her soul to King Coal -- and she was rewarded with votes. The claims she "appealed" to the working class is bunk; she knew where her bread was buttered and the people in the region expressed their gratitude accordingly. An ideology right out of the era of the machines which we thought ended in the 1930s.
From a Canadian perspective, we're seeing serious talk about the revival of coal mines long mothballed because of their polluting nature -- because of the increasing demands for power and the lack of support for alternatives in part because of NIMBY. Again, the earliest we can expect "clean coal," presuming it can be made to work (a big if) is 2020 which is when the next round of emission targets are supposed to be met; and we have a government quite content to continue to pollute to the heavens and beyond while reducing "intensity" while increasing actual outputs of carcinogens and other disease causing elements.
Not that the people at the permanent public service in Ottawa -- particularly Public Works -- are entirely innocent on this one either. Here in Hamilton, there's a co-generation plant downtown that operates using steam diverted by pipeline from the steel and chemical plants. Literally, free or very low cost heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. Guess which building is not plugged into the network? Yup -- the brand new federal offices; while older office buildings agreed to be connected. They'd rather be powered by the huge coal plant in Nanticoke; which is scheduled for shutdown in a few years but is still running at full speed especially in the current heatwave making smog even worse. Oddly enough, the former federal offices (scheduled to be converted into a hotel or lofts) ran on solar power. There isn't even a windmill on top of the new building.
Hypocrites. Both federally and provincially.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Fighting C. diff
The last few years have not been easy ones for hospitals across Ontario and Québec, what with superbugs like SARS and more ominously clostridium difficile, a severe colon infection. In one outbreak in a Hamilton area hospital, 62 patients died. The response by public health authorities has been nothing short of appalling -- far too late, far too half-hearted and even insulting to the families of both those who died, as well as to those lucky enough to survive.
It's also been a big issue in the UK, where in 2006 -- the last year for which there are complete numbers -- about 6500 died from c. difficile. Interestingly, the response from the various units of the NHS have varied drastically -- from indifference from public health authorities in Wales to unsanitary conditions (janitorial duties are contracted out there -- hint, hint!), to an all out and all-party war against the disease in Northern Ireland. These include surprise health inspections, £10 million in extra funding to stop the current outbreak (which started in January) and an forthcoming independent inquiry.
To think that Ulster with all its lingering sectarian problems manages to get it and can put aside prejudices to deal with a health crisis, while we in totally secular Canada don't get it is embarrassing. This strain has been around since 2006 and over 250 have died in total in Ontario, over simple and preventable steps that could have been taken. Just because our health care system is strained is no excuse to put patients first and make sure they're not killed by the hospitals they're staying at -- or the unhealthy conditions therefrom.
George Smitherman must stop being in denial over this and call an independent inquiry. It's long overdue.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
It's also been a big issue in the UK, where in 2006 -- the last year for which there are complete numbers -- about 6500 died from c. difficile. Interestingly, the response from the various units of the NHS have varied drastically -- from indifference from public health authorities in Wales to unsanitary conditions (janitorial duties are contracted out there -- hint, hint!), to an all out and all-party war against the disease in Northern Ireland. These include surprise health inspections, £10 million in extra funding to stop the current outbreak (which started in January) and an forthcoming independent inquiry.
To think that Ulster with all its lingering sectarian problems manages to get it and can put aside prejudices to deal with a health crisis, while we in totally secular Canada don't get it is embarrassing. This strain has been around since 2006 and over 250 have died in total in Ontario, over simple and preventable steps that could have been taken. Just because our health care system is strained is no excuse to put patients first and make sure they're not killed by the hospitals they're staying at -- or the unhealthy conditions therefrom.
George Smitherman must stop being in denial over this and call an independent inquiry. It's long overdue.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Where did it go wrong?
From the team at ElectoralVote.com comes this analysis of where Hillary Clinton got it wrong -- and so did the press. I found the last point, that she found her voice too late, to be true but also disturbing. Remember how a year ago everyone was saying it would be a subway series between Clinton and Rudy Giuliani? Seems like a lifetime ago.
With the conventions some time away, I hope to focus on some hot Canadian topics the next little while.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
With the conventions some time away, I hope to focus on some hot Canadian topics the next little while.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
"They're all gone"
It was a few days before I was born, but those three words still continue to haunt television to this day ... and they were said by the legendary sportswriter Jim McKay. Munich, 1972 -- the murder of 11 athletes from Israel. In a clever move, ABC News decided to throw the newscast to McKay, who broadcast for 16 hours straight -- on his one day off during the Games. He became the first sports reader to win a News Emmy.
He died yesterday; one of the last true giants. God bless you, sir.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
He died yesterday; one of the last true giants. God bless you, sir.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Hillary forgot America isn't San Marino
The Hillary Clinton campaign for 2008 really began back in 1993, when one of the US network anchors -- I believe it was the late Peter Jennings -- asked Bill, shortly after the Clintons moved into the White House -- if he thought the day would come when there would be a First Gentleman. Slick Willy said that he hoped so; in a tone that said he hoped it was him.
Today, Mrs. Clinton formally "suspends" her campaign and will officially endorse Barack Obama. The way things have gone for her family this year, one would think she'd be leaving the Democratic Party and running a third party candidacy. It's hard to believe that this day has come, that the front-runner for the last three and a half years would throw in the towel to an insurgent from the Land of Lincoln; from the kind of people she allegedly represents.
There are all sorts of reasons to explain her loss -- her husband wittingly playing the race card, her relying on a donor list of rich people, not understanding that 2008 is not 1992. Personally, I thought something was afoot when John Kerry decided to give Obama and not Mrs. Clinton access to Kerry's e-mail address book of 3 million. Then other people of Clinton's own generation including Caroline Kennedy and Julie Eisenhower -- Tricky Dick's daughter! -- announced they were behind Obama. They understood what Clinton could or would not, the desire not just for change in policy but in generational change.
As for Obama's "pastor problem," let's not forget that McCain has had his own issues with some preachers and even Mrs. Clinton has rubbed noses with the First Estate on a whole bunch of issues.
I think this really is tied in with the culture wars; that after forty years people are sick and tired of the Puritans telling Americans what they can read, see on TV, surf for on the Internet. Mrs. Clinton of course is on the left of these wars but much of her money does come from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, those who support attitudes towards culture like "Independent Democrat" Joe Lieberman who without surprise is supporting John McCain this year.
Money from certain kinds of people can prove to be corrupting. And in her desire for absolute power, she was corrupted absolutely by that money given $2300 at a time, the maximum allowed under law. Obama avoided that, instead taking donations from a much larger pool and in much smaller amounts. Mrs. Clinton could not have seen that strength in numbers and it ultimately demonstrated itself in the delegate count. For every attempt she made to create New Math she made herself even more desperate looking.
Today should have been Clinton's day to have stood on top of a pedestal. Instead, she made herself one -- not just for the above reasons but also because of her husband who couldn't just keep his mouth shut. Who knows what will happen on November 4th, but I for one thank God that we no longer have to deal with "Two for the Price of One." This isn't San Marino which actually has a co-presidency under its 400+ year old constitution (there are two captains regent, not one, and from opposing parties to keep an eye on each other -- and they only serve for six months before giving two other people their chance). Napoleon admired this system so much he refused to invade the tiny country while he took over most of the rest of Europe; and even Abraham Lincoln, Obama's and Clinton's fellow Illinoisan, admired the Sanmarinese for creating a model he thought America should emulate.
But the country at stake is America. There is only one boss, only one President in America. And beyond generational issues, there were serious concerns that Hillary would not be running the show but that Bill would. She's proven she can run the country on her own, but the perception would always be there. Besides, the two term limit was put into place for a reason.
Hillary should be welcome in any administration (I've already said I think she'd make a great Attorney General), but Obama has to make his first act banning Bill from the White House precinct. The presence of his official portrait is enough of a distraction.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Today, Mrs. Clinton formally "suspends" her campaign and will officially endorse Barack Obama. The way things have gone for her family this year, one would think she'd be leaving the Democratic Party and running a third party candidacy. It's hard to believe that this day has come, that the front-runner for the last three and a half years would throw in the towel to an insurgent from the Land of Lincoln; from the kind of people she allegedly represents.
There are all sorts of reasons to explain her loss -- her husband wittingly playing the race card, her relying on a donor list of rich people, not understanding that 2008 is not 1992. Personally, I thought something was afoot when John Kerry decided to give Obama and not Mrs. Clinton access to Kerry's e-mail address book of 3 million. Then other people of Clinton's own generation including Caroline Kennedy and Julie Eisenhower -- Tricky Dick's daughter! -- announced they were behind Obama. They understood what Clinton could or would not, the desire not just for change in policy but in generational change.
As for Obama's "pastor problem," let's not forget that McCain has had his own issues with some preachers and even Mrs. Clinton has rubbed noses with the First Estate on a whole bunch of issues.
I think this really is tied in with the culture wars; that after forty years people are sick and tired of the Puritans telling Americans what they can read, see on TV, surf for on the Internet. Mrs. Clinton of course is on the left of these wars but much of her money does come from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, those who support attitudes towards culture like "Independent Democrat" Joe Lieberman who without surprise is supporting John McCain this year.
Money from certain kinds of people can prove to be corrupting. And in her desire for absolute power, she was corrupted absolutely by that money given $2300 at a time, the maximum allowed under law. Obama avoided that, instead taking donations from a much larger pool and in much smaller amounts. Mrs. Clinton could not have seen that strength in numbers and it ultimately demonstrated itself in the delegate count. For every attempt she made to create New Math she made herself even more desperate looking.
Today should have been Clinton's day to have stood on top of a pedestal. Instead, she made herself one -- not just for the above reasons but also because of her husband who couldn't just keep his mouth shut. Who knows what will happen on November 4th, but I for one thank God that we no longer have to deal with "Two for the Price of One." This isn't San Marino which actually has a co-presidency under its 400+ year old constitution (there are two captains regent, not one, and from opposing parties to keep an eye on each other -- and they only serve for six months before giving two other people their chance). Napoleon admired this system so much he refused to invade the tiny country while he took over most of the rest of Europe; and even Abraham Lincoln, Obama's and Clinton's fellow Illinoisan, admired the Sanmarinese for creating a model he thought America should emulate.
But the country at stake is America. There is only one boss, only one President in America. And beyond generational issues, there were serious concerns that Hillary would not be running the show but that Bill would. She's proven she can run the country on her own, but the perception would always be there. Besides, the two term limit was put into place for a reason.
Hillary should be welcome in any administration (I've already said I think she'd make a great Attorney General), but Obama has to make his first act banning Bill from the White House precinct. The presence of his official portrait is enough of a distraction.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Magnificent, desolate isolation -- Juneau style
Many Canadians may remember the intense debate about the "fixed link" project for a road crossing between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. Proponents tried to point out how it would reduce costs for the island, in particular the agriculture industry which would no longer be tied to the ferry schedule. Opponents were just as assertive that it would destroy the way of life on the island, laid back and introspective. In the end, a referendum approved the concept and the bridge was built.
A decade on, the Confederation Bridge certainly has been a success, but it's also had its price. The tourist board in PEI still promotes the "gentle island" but the frame of mind one got oneself into to merely visit the place is lost forever.
I was thinking about that when I read this article in today's NYT about a proposed road link from the presently isolated capital of Alaska, Juneau. While the road about 80 km long from Juneau to Skagway and Haines would link the city to the rest of the North American road network, many in the city are actually against the idea -- citing the environmental toll and pointing out that the city is readily accessible by ferry already. Others, of course, favour the project because of among other things the current dearth of employment opportunities in the panhandle -- which has a familiar ring to those who remember the bridge debate here in Canada.
For a state that has gotten a bad rap for paying its people royalty cheques from the Alaska Pipeline to shut up about the toll the oil industry takes, and its often enthusiastic support for the ANWR project, it's interesting to see there are some people who actually favour their isolation. No one knows where this is going to wind up, but for some the Last Frontier should be just that and that alone is a progressive concept.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
A decade on, the Confederation Bridge certainly has been a success, but it's also had its price. The tourist board in PEI still promotes the "gentle island" but the frame of mind one got oneself into to merely visit the place is lost forever.
I was thinking about that when I read this article in today's NYT about a proposed road link from the presently isolated capital of Alaska, Juneau. While the road about 80 km long from Juneau to Skagway and Haines would link the city to the rest of the North American road network, many in the city are actually against the idea -- citing the environmental toll and pointing out that the city is readily accessible by ferry already. Others, of course, favour the project because of among other things the current dearth of employment opportunities in the panhandle -- which has a familiar ring to those who remember the bridge debate here in Canada.
For a state that has gotten a bad rap for paying its people royalty cheques from the Alaska Pipeline to shut up about the toll the oil industry takes, and its often enthusiastic support for the ANWR project, it's interesting to see there are some people who actually favour their isolation. No one knows where this is going to wind up, but for some the Last Frontier should be just that and that alone is a progressive concept.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Hockey Theme bye-bye?
Can it be that we are living in a country without "The Hockey Theme," a tune by Dolores Claman that is so embedded in our psyche that it's been called this country's second national anthem? Looks as if the CBC's long time licensing agreement to use the tune is about to expire.
Heck, even Norm Macdonald used it a few times when he was host of "Weekend Report" on SNL. Come on, $500 per use isn't a lot of money for an agency that gets about a billion from the feds every year.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Heck, even Norm Macdonald used it a few times when he was host of "Weekend Report" on SNL. Come on, $500 per use isn't a lot of money for an agency that gets about a billion from the feds every year.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Obama and McCain's petroeuro problem
As the US Presidential campaign begins in earnest today (finally!), Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama will have to address a whole series of issues. One of them is the effect the devaluation of the US currency against other benchmarks -- the pound, the euro and the Canadian dollar among others -- have had on the economy. One reason for America's sag is the fact some OPEC members are insisting on payment in euros and not dollars for the oil they export; and since the last recession the common currency of 15 EU and 3 non-EU states has been on a tear. Russia for its part is demanding payment in rubles which is actually becoming a viable currency -- which they then turn into hard currencies such as the pound and the euro; dollars much less so.
In fact, many Americans aware too much that their currency is now on par with the loonie (which may not be too much of a problem for the US since the oil they import from us Canadians is more reliable) may be far less aware that since 9/11 -- when the euro was still just a virtual currency and three months before it became "real" money -- the greenback has lost fully roughly half its value. It's gone from 87 cents to $1.60 against the euro, and euro parity with the pound sterling may just be around the corner which would devalue the US currency even more.
The overall decline was happening before the subprime crisis really hit. But having a barrel to the head of Americans with the double whammy of currency and oil must really be hurting. Traders talk about the "war premium" on oil, about $25 per barrel, but are less open about the fact that throwing in currency wars may be adding another equal amount. Put it another way, 75 cents per gallon of gas can be explained by the fact of demand for payment in euros.
The issue of petroeuros over petrodollars isn't going away any time soon. I'd like to know what both candidates think about this.
The current situation is probably a bubble right now and even Alberta has suggested (in their budget) the price is bound to drop to $78 per barrel by March of next year. But the speculation over money will not end anytime soon. The next president will have to come up with a bold strategy to put some rationality back into the system (not the least of which will mean energy independence) and make the greenback a trusted currency again. Otherwise, any good that could be done will be squandered by ever increasing demands by rogue dictators.
As a side note, the euro becoming a reserve currency may be a boost to the pride of Europeans but they're being slammed unfairly by the substitution of petrodollars for petroeuros as well. Iran is an even greater threat to European security than American, and the next US President will have to take a stand on this as well if he is to be a trusted leader.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
In fact, many Americans aware too much that their currency is now on par with the loonie (which may not be too much of a problem for the US since the oil they import from us Canadians is more reliable) may be far less aware that since 9/11 -- when the euro was still just a virtual currency and three months before it became "real" money -- the greenback has lost fully roughly half its value. It's gone from 87 cents to $1.60 against the euro, and euro parity with the pound sterling may just be around the corner which would devalue the US currency even more.
The overall decline was happening before the subprime crisis really hit. But having a barrel to the head of Americans with the double whammy of currency and oil must really be hurting. Traders talk about the "war premium" on oil, about $25 per barrel, but are less open about the fact that throwing in currency wars may be adding another equal amount. Put it another way, 75 cents per gallon of gas can be explained by the fact of demand for payment in euros.
The issue of petroeuros over petrodollars isn't going away any time soon. I'd like to know what both candidates think about this.
The current situation is probably a bubble right now and even Alberta has suggested (in their budget) the price is bound to drop to $78 per barrel by March of next year. But the speculation over money will not end anytime soon. The next president will have to come up with a bold strategy to put some rationality back into the system (not the least of which will mean energy independence) and make the greenback a trusted currency again. Otherwise, any good that could be done will be squandered by ever increasing demands by rogue dictators.
As a side note, the euro becoming a reserve currency may be a boost to the pride of Europeans but they're being slammed unfairly by the substitution of petrodollars for petroeuros as well. Iran is an even greater threat to European security than American, and the next US President will have to take a stand on this as well if he is to be a trusted leader.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Revolution 2008, Day One
Losing Presidential nominees sure know how to pick them. In 1988, Mike Dukakis' keynote address was given by an Ozark boy named Bill Clinton who just went on and on and on (over an hour) but made a name for himself and four years later won the Presidency. In 2004, John Kerry hand-picked an almost total unknown from the south side of Chicago named Barack Obama who wowed the world in roughly 20 minutes with his vision about the "audacity of hope." While Kerry narrowly lost the election against Dubya, Obama won his Senate seat by a 4-1 margin and immediately thought of things even bigger.
Last night's win by Barack Obama officially winding up the Democratic nomination to be US President is more than just historic. To be fair, a steady stream of the PLEOs all day and going well into prime time put him close enough to make Montana (which he won) and South Dakota (which he lost) mathematical exercises. Still, what's happened can be called no less than a revolution. So much so that the Founding Fathers who defined a black or mixed race person as being 60% of a human being are probably spinning in their crypts so fast they're trying to sink the country they founded.
Tough luck, dead dudes. For 141 years after blacks were given full citizenship and 43 years after they won full voting rights, a US party has pulled off what even a decade ago would have been seen as totally unthinkable. In his speech last night, given in the same room where the GOP will have their convention in three month's time, Obama sounded perhaps the most presidential of any candidate America has seen in forty years.
It's hard to believe that 40 years ago today the last truly inspirational leader, Robert Kennedy, was ... um, we all know what happened so let's not go there.
By comparison, John McCain (the Republican nominee) spoke in New Orleans for obviously symbolic reasons but to a very small crowd of only about 200 and he was absolutely boring in launching his campaign; while in New York City Hillary Clinton was intransigent rather than offering to start the healing process now as it so desperately needs to be. I'm not really surprised she acted the way she did, but being a sore loser while pretending to be a "winner" is not most people's idea of being bigger than one is. If she was hoping for the veep slot, she lost it and while I think she has a role to play in an Obama administration -- presuming that's how it will be in January -- it won't be in the number two office.
The convention isn't till the end of August, so Obama needs to do somthing to stay in the news every single day so McCain can't possibly control the agenda. We all remember the Swift Boat campaign four years ago and the time between conventions for Dubya to more than get over the bump. But at long last, it's over. Let the Games begin. There are millions of Canadians, more than Sen. Obama knows, who are hoping and praying for him and dreaming the world's long nightmare may finally come to an end on November 4. But five months is an eon in politics.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Last night's win by Barack Obama officially winding up the Democratic nomination to be US President is more than just historic. To be fair, a steady stream of the PLEOs all day and going well into prime time put him close enough to make Montana (which he won) and South Dakota (which he lost) mathematical exercises. Still, what's happened can be called no less than a revolution. So much so that the Founding Fathers who defined a black or mixed race person as being 60% of a human being are probably spinning in their crypts so fast they're trying to sink the country they founded.
Tough luck, dead dudes. For 141 years after blacks were given full citizenship and 43 years after they won full voting rights, a US party has pulled off what even a decade ago would have been seen as totally unthinkable. In his speech last night, given in the same room where the GOP will have their convention in three month's time, Obama sounded perhaps the most presidential of any candidate America has seen in forty years.
It's hard to believe that 40 years ago today the last truly inspirational leader, Robert Kennedy, was ... um, we all know what happened so let's not go there.
By comparison, John McCain (the Republican nominee) spoke in New Orleans for obviously symbolic reasons but to a very small crowd of only about 200 and he was absolutely boring in launching his campaign; while in New York City Hillary Clinton was intransigent rather than offering to start the healing process now as it so desperately needs to be. I'm not really surprised she acted the way she did, but being a sore loser while pretending to be a "winner" is not most people's idea of being bigger than one is. If she was hoping for the veep slot, she lost it and while I think she has a role to play in an Obama administration -- presuming that's how it will be in January -- it won't be in the number two office.
The convention isn't till the end of August, so Obama needs to do somthing to stay in the news every single day so McCain can't possibly control the agenda. We all remember the Swift Boat campaign four years ago and the time between conventions for Dubya to more than get over the bump. But at long last, it's over. Let the Games begin. There are millions of Canadians, more than Sen. Obama knows, who are hoping and praying for him and dreaming the world's long nightmare may finally come to an end on November 4. But five months is an eon in politics.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
It's finally over -- maybe
The AP is reporting that Clinton will acknowledge that Obama will have the most delegates tonight; but in the last few minutes Clinton's manager McAuliffe said Clinton has no plans of conceding at all later. Actually, that's not what the wire story said. It said Clinton will say Obama has met the magic number of 2118 -- which will almost certainly happen when undecided Representatives and Senators rush Obama's way after South Dakota and Montana close tonight.
The fact she's not conceding indicates means she somehow still thinks she can arm-twist the PLEOs to change their minds and go her way in Denver. Sorry, ma'am, not gonna happen. No Obama superdelegate has switched her way; in fact a handful of party officials and even some of her elected pledged delegates have switched from Clinton to Obama.
Still, it looks like tonight or tomorrow, the real race will finally be on. Obama will need to find some way to placate Clinton. I'd suggest Attorney General -- so as to restore the indepedence of the Justice Department from White House control.
Just as an afterthought: That 50% penalty that Florida and Michigan got last weekend? It's interesting the GOP imposed the exact same penalty on those two states up front. The fact that it took over six months for the Dems to get their act together was a disgrace.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
The fact she's not conceding indicates means she somehow still thinks she can arm-twist the PLEOs to change their minds and go her way in Denver. Sorry, ma'am, not gonna happen. No Obama superdelegate has switched her way; in fact a handful of party officials and even some of her elected pledged delegates have switched from Clinton to Obama.
Still, it looks like tonight or tomorrow, the real race will finally be on. Obama will need to find some way to placate Clinton. I'd suggest Attorney General -- so as to restore the indepedence of the Justice Department from White House control.
Just as an afterthought: That 50% penalty that Florida and Michigan got last weekend? It's interesting the GOP imposed the exact same penalty on those two states up front. The fact that it took over six months for the Dems to get their act together was a disgrace.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Reverse logic, part whatever
Hard to believe, isn't it, that the Cons here in Canada would try to block attempts by Ontario and Québec to implement a carbon cap and trade system to address pollution issues. This almost sounds like -- no, it exactly sounds like -- the Bushie run EPA in the States, which is trying to block California and fourteen other states from getting a waiver from federal rules so they can impose even tougher vehicle emission regulations than exist already.
It's reverse logic. The jurisdictions that have the worst pollution problems, or at least have administrations that recognize they do, want to do their part to offset and then some the increasing pollution from parts of the continent with governments that still have head in their sands.
The fact is, if leadership won't come from the top, then decisions will have to come from the bottom. In the case of cars and trucks, for example, auto manufacturers decided long ago to go to a "fifty-state emission" system of manufacturing rather than have two separate systems -- one for California and the Northeast, and one for everywhere else. It was simply a matter of cost efficiencies. They adopted the California standard as the "50 state" one; and by default Canadians got the benefit of that as well for vehicles sold here. Until Bushie and Harper, the EPA and Environment Canada never had a problem with this since CARB standards far exceed national ones.
Alberta's government, and by extension Ottawa, shows no real interest in real reductions in pollution. So what does Stephen Harper expect McGuinty and Charest to do? The PM is so high and mighty on provincial rights yet he draws the line when it comes to his own anemic "green" plan.
Kang and Kodos, if you're reading this ...
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
It's reverse logic. The jurisdictions that have the worst pollution problems, or at least have administrations that recognize they do, want to do their part to offset and then some the increasing pollution from parts of the continent with governments that still have head in their sands.
The fact is, if leadership won't come from the top, then decisions will have to come from the bottom. In the case of cars and trucks, for example, auto manufacturers decided long ago to go to a "fifty-state emission" system of manufacturing rather than have two separate systems -- one for California and the Northeast, and one for everywhere else. It was simply a matter of cost efficiencies. They adopted the California standard as the "50 state" one; and by default Canadians got the benefit of that as well for vehicles sold here. Until Bushie and Harper, the EPA and Environment Canada never had a problem with this since CARB standards far exceed national ones.
Alberta's government, and by extension Ottawa, shows no real interest in real reductions in pollution. So what does Stephen Harper expect McGuinty and Charest to do? The PM is so high and mighty on provincial rights yet he draws the line when it comes to his own anemic "green" plan.
Kang and Kodos, if you're reading this ...
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Some ideas on Canada's foreign and trade policy
As Canada continues to deal with the aftermath of the Bernier resignation and his ex-girlfriend's possible ties to organized crime, we need to have a serious debate about our foreign and trade policy -- one which has until recently had a great deal of respect around the world. Set aside the short term embarrassment. We need to look ahead to what kind of picture we want to project to the world.
We are strong allies of our NATO partners as well as Japan, Australia and New Zealand and will continue to be so. We also recognize the need to build bridges with countries we consider to be our enemies, including Russia and Mainland China. In that sense, being the "honest broker" kind of country. Yet all too often and especially in recent years, we've put trade ahead of human rights. We used to tie lowering of trade barriers and the debt of poorer countries to improvements in individuals rights and the insistence upon an independent judiciary and clear rules for corporate operations. What happened to that?
We support the state of Israel. This should continue as long as there is an Israel which God willing will be for all time. The issue of the Palestinians must be dealt with, however. Enforcing security against would be terrorists is one thing. Treating the entire population in the Occupied Territories with collective guilt and forcing them onto a separate road network (among other things) doesn't help those who want to live and let live. We must take a hard line with Fatah and Hamas, but to equate support for peaceful Palestinians with anti-Semitism as Stephen Harper has is just plain wrong. We need to reclaim our reputation as an "honest broker" before we're seen as nothing more than a satellite of the United States who supports only so-called "Zionism" and nothing else.
In terms of Africa and Latin America and to some extent Asia, we have dropped the ball when it comes to development goals. It's just wrong as Harper has suggested to give up on some countries as lost causes -- those lost cause states breed the next generation of terrorists. (This attitude is just as narcissist as his infamous "culture of defeatism" remark when he dismissed Atlantic Canadians some years back and it showed itself in his recalculating the equalization formula.) In this department, we as a nation now that we are in the trillion dollar GDP club are more than capable of hitting a 0.7% GDP target. $7 billion for foreign aid may sound like a lot, but aimed at viable projects designed to build self-sufficiency, it could go a long way to meeting the 2015 development goals set by the United Nations.
Finally, we need to have a bigger picture when it comes to trade and to really think big. Beyond NAFTA, Israel, Chile, Peru and Central America, we need to recognize that we can't put most of our eggs in with the United States. Given our historical ties, agreements with Australia and New Zealand could be considered.
We should also consider going beyond our agreement with EFTA (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) and try for some kind of agreement with the 27 members of the EU. I have suggested this before but as America continues to sink into economic morass it looks like Europe may increasingly be our future when it comes to exports. By no means does this mean at some point we would join the Schengen Area (which would mean even tighter border controls with the US, and crossing the border right now is getting to be a hassle), nor does it mean we'd drop the loonie for the Euro (it's kind of nice to have our own currency as a hedge in addition to the greenback) . What it would mean is that we would present ourselves as a country with an open door policy unlike the US which is rapidly becoming a dictatorship under the influence of the close-minded like Lou Dobbs who dismiss any reasonable trade agreement as a "sellout" or honest attempts at immigration reform as "amnesty." Common labour and environmental standards would also mean efficiencies in production meaning more employment opportunities.
Basic bottom line, we need to think big again. We're not getting that right now.
Vote this post at Progressive Bloggers.
We are strong allies of our NATO partners as well as Japan, Australia and New Zealand and will continue to be so. We also recognize the need to build bridges with countries we consider to be our enemies, including Russia and Mainland China. In that sense, being the "honest broker" kind of country. Yet all too often and especially in recent years, we've put trade ahead of human rights. We used to tie lowering of trade barriers and the debt of poorer countries to improvements in individuals rights and the insistence upon an independent judiciary and clear rules for corporate operations. What happened to that?
We support the state of Israel. This should continue as long as there is an Israel which God willing will be for all time. The issue of the Palestinians must be dealt with, however. Enforcing security against would be terrorists is one thing. Treating the entire population in the Occupied Territories with collective guilt and forcing them onto a separate road network (among other things) doesn't help those who want to live and let live. We must take a hard line with Fatah and Hamas, but to equate support for peaceful Palestinians with anti-Semitism as Stephen Harper has is just plain wrong. We need to reclaim our reputation as an "honest broker" before we're seen as nothing more than a satellite of the United States who supports only so-called "Zionism" and nothing else.
In terms of Africa and Latin America and to some extent Asia, we have dropped the ball when it comes to development goals. It's just wrong as Harper has suggested to give up on some countries as lost causes -- those lost cause states breed the next generation of terrorists. (This attitude is just as narcissist as his infamous "culture of defeatism" remark when he dismissed Atlantic Canadians some years back and it showed itself in his recalculating the equalization formula.) In this department, we as a nation now that we are in the trillion dollar GDP club are more than capable of hitting a 0.7% GDP target. $7 billion for foreign aid may sound like a lot, but aimed at viable projects designed to build self-sufficiency, it could go a long way to meeting the 2015 development goals set by the United Nations.
Finally, we need to have a bigger picture when it comes to trade and to really think big. Beyond NAFTA, Israel, Chile, Peru and Central America, we need to recognize that we can't put most of our eggs in with the United States. Given our historical ties, agreements with Australia and New Zealand could be considered.
We should also consider going beyond our agreement with EFTA (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) and try for some kind of agreement with the 27 members of the EU. I have suggested this before but as America continues to sink into economic morass it looks like Europe may increasingly be our future when it comes to exports. By no means does this mean at some point we would join the Schengen Area (which would mean even tighter border controls with the US, and crossing the border right now is getting to be a hassle), nor does it mean we'd drop the loonie for the Euro (it's kind of nice to have our own currency as a hedge in addition to the greenback) . What it would mean is that we would present ourselves as a country with an open door policy unlike the US which is rapidly becoming a dictatorship under the influence of the close-minded like Lou Dobbs who dismiss any reasonable trade agreement as a "sellout" or honest attempts at immigration reform as "amnesty." Common labour and environmental standards would also mean efficiencies in production meaning more employment opportunities.
Basic bottom line, we need to think big again. We're not getting that right now.
Vote this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)