Sunday, July 31, 2011

Obama, Congress Reach a Debt Deal

Debt Ceiling Crisis: This deal sucks!

They did it! Whoopee!

It looks like the Democrats and Republicans have agreed to a deal on raising the debt ceiling. How did they do it? It was very simple. The Democrats agreed to almost everything the Republicans wanted.

The deal cuts 1 trillion dollars over ten years and forms a bi-partisan committee to discuss how future cuts are to be made. If the committee comes to an impasse then pre-decided cuts will take place which will effect entitlement programs and the military, something each party will not want. This will drive them into a negotiated deal. The Republicans do not want cuts to the military and the Dems do not want cuts to entitlement programs.

What the deal doesn't have is any increases in revenue. No tax increases to those who caused this economic mess. No cuts to subsidies for oil companies or ethanol producers. No plugging of the loopholes that enables companies like General Electric to pay zero taxes while making record profits.

The little guy gets screwed while the wealthy carry on. They need to contribute to the country also!

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Democrats: Republicans refusing to negotiate on debt crisis

Republicans want this debt crisis!

After not posting for two weeks I can see we are no further along in solving this manufactured debt crisis then when I last wrote about this. Now we are getting down to the wire. The question is, "Will we have a deal before midnight on the last day?" Probably!

In the past the debt ceiling was approved by the House as a routine procedure with both Democrats and Republicans participating in the process. The present situation has been solely created by the Republicans in order to draw attention to the issue of reducing the debt, an issue they would like to run on in 2012. Why this issue? Because they are trying to go back to what they once were known for, fiscal responsibility.

The truth is that since 1980 (31 years) they have had the presidency for 20 years and they have never balanced the budget or created a surplus. They increased spending without raising the correct amount of revenue to pay for it. During this time after 8 years of the Democratic presidency under Bill Clinton the Democrats were able to balance the budget and create a surplus but then we had 8 more years of George Bush who accelerated spending at an exorbitant rate. He allowed financial institutes to play risky games with their customers money resulting in the biggest recession since the 1929 Great Depression. All of this has been placed in the arms of a new president, Barrack Obama.

Now the Republicans are trying to redeem themselves, counting on the short memories of the electorate. They are trying to show voters how they are willing to stand on their new found principal of reducing the deficit while insisting on tax cuts for themselves and their rich friends. If these tax cuts come to fruition they will be felt by the middle class and poor. This is a risky game of brinkmanship they are playing that may well backfire in the polls during the 2012 election, not to mention sending the already fragile economy into another tailspin.

One thing that is certain, is that Tuesday will tell all what our future outcome will be!

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Debt Crisis - Cantor's Crisis - Republicans Back Down .

While President Obama is asking for a 4 trillion dollar cut in the federal debt, the Republicans are backing away from their main platform of reducing the federal debt and balancing the budget. The four trillion dollar reduction included cuts to entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. In addition to this they also wanted to cut over 700 billion to the Military. The only item President Obama was asking from the Republicans was some closing of corporate tax loopholes. In particular subsidies to Oil Companies that are enjoying billions of dollars of profit. They were asking for no tax increases.

Republicans are showing how little they care about reducing the debt by backing away from this offer. What really scares them are the closing of the corporate loopholes. This would put them in direct opposition to their main campaign funders and friends in the corporate world. The Republicans are really only about cutting taxes whether that results in increasing the debt or not. Most of what they propose for tax cuts are only for the rich. The irony is that many of the rich are not even asking for it.

The most inflexible of all the Republicans is Eric Cantor. The amateur style of his negotiating reveals his self-serving  opportunist character that looks to lap up the lime-lite without any consideration to the rest of the American public.

Saturday, July 9, 2011

Big Government Can Do Big Things - What makes a strong country?

We hear a lot of rhetoric these days about shrinking big government and "getting government out of the lives of the people". Do we even know what we are agreeing to when we say "Yeh!" to these coined statements made by platitudinal politicians who don't believe in their own words? For most of the supporters of this view I doubt whether they have put much thought into these ideas, except for immediate anger over paying taxes or receiving a traffic ticket.

Is having a large central government detrimental to keeping a nation strong or having large government revenues harmful to a country's economy? People need to sober up and take a thoughtful second look.

When government is regulated by a constitution and its police force and judicial systems are independent of government interference then it is essential in order to make a strong nation that it has a strong centralized government with the financial wealth to be able to make big decisions. Why, you ask. There are many reasons.

The most important reason is to protect the nation from foreign forces, both militarily and economically. The reason for a strong military is obvious and needs little explanation. To have strong financial resources at a government's disposal is important to pay for policing and it's military.  Infrastructure is also an important factor here. Without access to a good transportation grid that's well maintained, a  country cannot get its goods to market. Without consistent delivery and access to electricity or other power sources a country would fall into the category of an undeveloped nation and quickly slide into poverty.
When government does not have the financial power to be able to stand up to Banks, or other forms of private enterprise then the people become vulnerable to the folly of that enterprise. As an example, when the government bought G.M. it saved approximately 1 million jobs and helped to stabilize the automotive industry. This could not have happened if the government did not have the financial resources to do this. If the government was too weak financially when 911 occurred then the government would have been helpless to do anything about it and Al Qaeda probably would have struck the U.S. again in some grandiose manner. If the government did not build the Hoover damn then there would have been little economic development in the Southwest of the country. If the government did not finance education then the majority of the people in the nation would be illiterate.


T he country doesn't need unbridled capitalism as there was in the late 1800's, nor does it need government controlling all of the industry.  Most countries thrive when there is regulated capitalism and occasionally the government intervenes to set direction or to avert disasters that can impact its people. In a democratic nation the government represents the people not itself or big business. Politicians who want to reduce the size of government significantly would like to go back to the days of the Industrial Revolution but do they really want to eat their food uninspected or do they want no regulations on Nuclear Power Plants. No Hoover Dam, N.A.S.A. or interstate highways?

Thursday, June 30, 2011

The Deficit Ceiling - Republicans Play Games

The Republicans have forgotten how to negotiate! They would like to push the country to the brink in order to score political points. While they're playing with fire, the country, and ultimately the world could dive into a new recession if we default on our debt. No government or opposition would ever have dreamed about doing such a thing in the past.

Are they insincere? Well, when you offer the Democrats 15% in raised revenues and 85% in cuts and then you quickly change and say you will only accept 100% cuts, this seems like game playing.  Especially when you consider that the Democrats were getting close to accepting their offer. Why change the offer when you are on the verge of a deal? Because you really aren't sincere about making a deal.

If the Republicans fail to make a deal by Aug. 2, then they will create an economic disaster that will not only effect the United States but also the rest of the world. You then could quite likely see a depression like the one in the 1930's.

It's likely the Republicans will agree to raise the debt ceiling and so it is important that the Democrats make some compromises but not give everything away. Much more posturing will be done before the deadline.

Monday, June 27, 2011

Postal Workers - Ordered Back - Imposed agreement - government controls labour relations.

It's funny how right wing governments always want to have the least amount of regulation as possible, on corporations  but when it comes to the unions the same thing doesn't apply. They do not want the chips to fall where they fall when a strike occurs but they want to interfere with the outcome. Of course it always ends up favoring the employers.


With public sector unions it's really easy for the government to rig the deck in their favor. They not only legislate them back to work but they force arbitration on the postal workers. In this case the arbitrator/mediator is mandated under the legislation to rule on the last offer that was on the table. The only problem is, is that the government changed the last offer from the government to the union to make it more regressive than in their real final offer. Government 1, postal workers 0.

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Stanley Cup Hockey Riots- Who are the heros?

If you were living outside of Vancouver and you heard about the rioting that happened on the streets of  Vancouver after the Vancouver Canucks lost the Stanley Cup Final to the Boston Bruins you may of surmised that the fans in Vancouver were poor losers. If you look closer at the story you will see that there were a number of stories within the story that challenged this assumption.


About 20,000 people came out the next morning into the streets of Vancouver to help clean-up the mess of broken glass, garbage and the aftermath of looting. During the riots many people put their own lives at risk to stop the looting and destruction. The majority of fans I talked with were disgusted by the actions of a few hundred entitled youth who have problems with drinking and aggression.

I was in the downtown area watching the game with some friends (one of them was from Boston). After the game my wife and I took the Sky Train Transit to leave the area. While we were on the train hundreds of youth and young adults poured onto the train. A fight broke out on the platform where people were boarding the train. The police broke up the fight and handcuffed the men involved. They used great restraint while many young people were snapping pictures and video tapping the event. A group of young men behind us were commenting about the event being historic and how they were a part of it.

After taking all this in, I laughed to myself at how naive many of these young adults were that they thought they were somehow part of some momentous time in history  Then I thought of those who were rioting in Syria or fighting against tyranny in Libya. One group has a real cause of freedom and the other group has pent up anger with no clear direction in their lives.

For those of you who do not live in this area, take note that we who do are ashamed of these people and many people who were down there are turning in photos and videos of the criminal acts to the police and they are now being arrested.

Vancouverites love their hockey but they love their city more. To those who stood up for what was right we commend you as true heros. By the way, the friend from Boston, he paid for the entire bill at our table. Now that's good sportsmanship.


Thursday, June 23, 2011

Republican Leadership Hopefuls - Anaemic slate -Platitudes and Hollow Promises



Well the Republicans have their leadership slate and have had their first debates. So far they've come up with nothing constructive. They were afraid to take each other on so they all took on Obama who wasn't there, of course.

Mitt Romney tried to deny that his health care plan he created for Massachusetts would also be effective for the entire country. Michelle Bachman wanted to announce that she was running for president, even though everyone else thought that that is why she was at the presidential debate. Ron Paul wanted to sell everything the government owned and Newt Gingrich created his own statistics about the Reagan era. The rest of the candidates and their conversations were just a blur of platitudnal mediocrity.

They are against universal health care, taxes for the rich, eliminating subsidies to oil companies and corporations. They would have let General Motors and Chrysler go bankrupt. They would like to lower or eliminate welfare, unemployment insurance and medicare for Seniors. They have little to offer to the middle-class and would like to lower the deficit by eliminating programs for the poor and elderly. They would eliminate President Obama's Health Care Plan. They and their friends are rich and they have rich interests in mind. Don't be fooled! Their claims are not factual.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Green Economy - No Carbon Taxes

There is much political disgust expressed with the pace of the production of Green Energy and the conversion to a Green Economy. The use of oil continues to suck money out of the pockets of North Americans while sending it abroad to other countries. We need quick solutions to start reducing our dependance on foreign oil and the climate changing carbon it produces.


The only way to get things moving at a rapid pace is through national legislation. At the beginning of the Second World War President Roosevelt met with car companies and other manufacturers and informed them that they had months to change their manufacturing so they would be only producing armaments of war. Canada also followed suit. Automobile manufactures were informed that they would no longer be producing domestic vehicles for sale. They could only produce vehicles for the Armed Forces. Research and Development was also directed in the same manner. This was radical and had never been done before but it was necessary in order to fight the war on two fronts and defeat the Axis powers.


In order to make a significant impact on carbon emissions and produce large numbers of new jobs the government would need to pass much less radical legislation. The legislation would need to have an overall goal but contain several steps in order to get to that goal. Here's how we could do it, as I see it:

Goal:  
To reduce carbon emissions by converting society so that it's sole energy is electricity produced by non-polluting sources that are mostly created and manufactured within North America. 
               
    1. Immediately legislation would be passed to ensure car manufactures produce internal combustion engines that only run on Natural Gas. This would take place in two years (5 years for large trucks).

               
    REASON: Natural Gas produces less carbon emissions and North America has enough N.G. without having to rely on foreign imports. This would stop the draining of financial resources (billions) out of North America. This can be done quite easily because it's a simple process to convert any vehicle to Natural Gas presently and many car companies actually produce N.G. vehicles as an option for their customers. This act alone would produce huge numbers of jobs. This would also buy "carbon"time for advances in technologies for more clean energy vehicles.  

    2. Legislation would be passed that require utility companies to produce/sell 25% of their electricity from clean sources (wind, solar, wave, hydro) in 5 years. This would then increase to 50% in ten years and 75% in 15 years and 95% in 20 years.

    REASON: The reason here is obvious. If we are going to run on electricity it has to be clean. This requirement will create the need for more green energy and thus leading to a new manufacturing boom.

         
    3.  Laws would be created to require that all green energy technology used in North America would be 75% manufactured in North America. 
              

    REASON: This is crucial in order to create millions of jobs in North America. This would also eclipse China's recent surge in building wind turbines and selling them to the U.S. and Canada. Why 75% and not 100%? This would give manufacturers the flexibility needed to import  specialized parts and components where the expertise is found in other countries.  The 75% would help to avoid a protectionist stance by the rest of the world and would allow us to sell this manufacturing elsewhere.

         
    4.  Legislation would need to be created to phase out coal fired generators over a 10 year period that do not have carbon free emissions. In addition a significant tonnage tax would be placed on all coal coming out of the ground. This tax would go directly into Research and Development for clean coal technology. The tax would be removed when the technology can ensure there are no harmful emissions coming from the burning of coal. 

    REASON: Coal burning reactors create the most carbon emissions of any fuel. The coal mining lobby is strong and advertises "Clean Coal". Presently there is no commercial coal burning that is clean and the advertising is deceptive.  There are experimental projects at work but the companies are loath to put them into action due to the costs.

     
    5.  Laws would be required to ban all subsidies (immediately) to oil companies and half of the savings would go into R&D research that help create the better storage of electricity (batteries etc.).   

    REASON: If electric cars are going to be a viable alternative then the battery life and recharge time need to increase considerably. Oil companies do not need subsidies by the  people of North America and never have. They are stealing tax dollars from North American tax payers.  Those who do not like paying taxes and lobby strong against any increases should be outraged by their money going to multi-trillion dollar companies.  

    6.  Laws need to be passed that would require 25% of car sales in North America being electric or plug-in hybrids in 5 years and increase by 25% every 5 years thereafter.  The reason is obvious and if we still have limited range of battery life by then then we will have to adjust our lives accordingly.

    Note: The reason why I have stated "North America" in these points is because of the NAFTA barriers regarding trade. Research and development are emphasized here because the continent has excelled and become a world leader when it has strong expertise in research and development. 


    This is not that difficult to implement but there is a lack of political will to carry this out. This is because a number of politicians have been corrupted by the fossil fuel lobbyists who pay millions into their campaigns and off shore accounts and the people who vote for them drink the Kool Aid and believe these politicians are representing their needs. The other side needs to take the risk and convince the rest of the population that this will be a good thing for the economy and planet earth.



    Sunday, June 12, 2011

    Green Energy - Green Economy - Where are they?

    Alright where's my affordable green energy car and where are all the windmills that are supposed to dot the landscape and seascape? Why are the oil companies still getting subsidies while making billions off of us? Where is the Green Revolution that President Obama and others were supposed to start when they took office. Great Britain has started?


    By 2010 I wanted one of my two cars to be an electric plug-in not one of these wimpy unplugable hybrids that get less gas mileage than my Hyundai Excel. The only two cars that seem somewhat affordable are the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf but the Volt is about $10,000 overpriced and the Nissan Leaf is about $15,000 over what it should be. We need affordable electrics for under $20,000.




    We should be on a manufacturing spree producing windmills, solar panels, and tidal propellers like aircraft and tanks were produced during the Second World War. This will produce jobs, jobs, jobs, as all the politicians keep singing about with no results. Where are the visionaries? Many of us are waiting!

    Thursday, June 9, 2011

    Anthony Weiner ! Why do Politician's Show Theirs?

    Anthony Weiner, the U.S. Representative for New York's 9th congressional district, has been exposing himself  by sending pictures of his private parts to various women via his cell phone. He confessed this behavior publicly on June 6th adding his behavior to a long list of politicians who have participated in various similar activities over the last decade.

    Many will discuss whether Weiner should have resigned or stayed in his Congressional seat.  The purpose of this post is not to discuss whether or not he should have resigned. Others may express their vitriolic opinions in response to this  subject.

    The real question for people is why are there so many politicians falling prey to such career destroying behaviors? Well, the answers are complicated and vary between people. The behavior is similar to porn addictions and other forms of sex-ting.

    For Politicians involved in these types of behaviors there are some commonalities that perhaps make them more prone to engage in such deviant activities. They come to Washington and are unable to mingle with the regular population. They are separated from family and significant others. This can contribute to feelings of isolation. Mix this with a sense of power and entitlement and you have a concoction for misbehavior.

    With regards to Sex-Ting, Pew research did a report on Teens and Sex-Ting which stated,
    “'Teens explained to us how sexually suggestive images have become a form of relationship currency', said Amanda Lenhart, Senior Research Specialist and author of the report. 'These images are shared as a part of or instead of sexual activity, or as a way of starting or maintaining a relationship with a significant other. And they are also passed along to friends for their entertainment value, as a joke or for fun.'” http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/Teens-and-Sexting.aspx 

    Which one of these reasons apply to Anthony Weiner, only he can answer but his actions have brought great disappointment to his constituents, wife, friends and family. He had the potential and conviction to go far in politics but he allowed his desires and juvenile antics to get the best of him.


    Wednesday, June 1, 2011

    Syria Tortures - a Bankrupt Regime - Child Killers!

    There is some more disgusting politics on the international scene. After the systematic rapes in Libya it was hard to imagine if things could get any worse for the Arab Spring uprisings. Yesterday it was reported that the despotic regime of Bashar al-Assad had captured a small 13 year old boy on April 29 during one of the protests. His name was Hamza al-Khatib, and he was delivered back to his parents dead. His body was battered and mutilated and said to have multiple gunshot wounds, bruises and a missing penis. One can only imagine the horror that his parents must have experienced when his body arrived at their home.

    Any credibility this regime still had has now evaporated as this child becomes a national symbol of hatred and defiance against the Baathist regime.  The ultimate bully, a regime that doesn't have the courage or awareness to step down and allow a government chosen and responsible to its citizens to rule in its place. The ultimate bully, a regime that picks on the most vulnerable in society because it wants to hold on to power no matter what the price.

    The people of Syria deserve democracy but will they get it? At this point it is unlikely that any help will come from the West. Their resources are depleted and their peoples are weary of war. Like many other countries that received little or no help from outside their borders, the Syrians  may have to find a way to throw off their oppressors on their own. Unfortunately this will probably not be done by peaceful protests but by armed rebellion leading to civil war.

    To the Arab Spring in Syria I say, "Live on and may you accomplish your dream"
     ةسسومبليش يور دريم ...فريدوم فريدوم فريدوم

    Sunday, May 29, 2011

    Rapes in Libya...Disgusting Politics....An African Repeat!


    More and more reports are coming in about systematic rape being committed by Gaddafi forces, especially from Misrata. This is a deliberate strategy that we have seen in countries before. Libyan society is quite conservative and most families would view this as shameful and will not speak out about it. Women who have been raped are viewed as "spoiled" and will have difficulty ever getting married or living a normal life.

    This systematic rape is done to those families that the Gaddafi's regime views as sympathetic towards the rebels. These acts are done to silence and bring shame to those families. This Rwandan style of intimidation is politics of the worst kind and the perpetrators need to be tried for war crimes. If there is any doubt that these actions are ordered directly from the regime we only need to look at who the perpetrators are. Captured pro government soldiers have reported (Andrew Harding B.B.C. May 23) that the soldiers organising these rapes were Libyan Special Forces who take their orders from the top.

    Many of the rebels have offered to marry the raped women to save them from public shame. Maybe its time to take out the Libyan chief commander, Muammar Gaddafi and scatter the forces so the rebels can take over. In other words, "It's time to take out the garbage!"

    Thursday, May 26, 2011

    Unions,....Time to Move Forward

    There seems to be a shift in Canada towards the left. There may be an opportunity for trade unions to pick-up the dropped ball and advance forward and convince society of it's need for union involvement and it's continued relevance.

    Partly why trade unionism is on a slow decline is because of the lack of organising effort on the part of the unions. The largest union in Canada is the Canadian Union of Public Employees. In the Metro- Vancouver area there is not one representative within C.U.P.E. dedicated to organising new certifications. Unions have become too complacent with the status-quo. They need to move forward and conquer new ground. Unions have lost their aggressiveness in society.

    To go along with this new drive there needs to be a re-education of society with regards to the role of unions within our society. Unions are responsible for much social justice but they also provide a stay in society, holding back the erosion of wages or stopping economic injustice.

    People in Canada love their social programs but many have no idea that these programs are a result of union efforts to change the conditions within society. Many have drank the Kool-aid of the right which say that unions are not necessary because Corporations have changed their ways and are much more compassionate. The naive need to realize that corporations only answer to the bottom line (i.e. -money) and only the bottom line matters. They will do whatever it takes to benefit themselves.  Search Amazon.com for unions in crisis the future of organized labor in America

    Tuesday, May 24, 2011

    Obama's Immigration - - - - Policy!

     President Obama is calling on legislators to reform the U.S. Immigration laws. There are many views on how to accomplish this. What should really be done to reform immigration?  The Republican's answer is to increase border security so Latinos cannot cross the border illegally. Once again they want to ignore the complexities of the issues and appeal to the ignorant.  As my teenage son would say, "Way to go Captain Obvious."


    Immigration reforms need to address the following issues:
    • There needs to be a process for how some illegal immigrants, that are living within the U.S., can become legal, carefully and gradually. 
    • There needs to be an orderly process with how farm workers can get temporary visas to work legally in the U.S. at jobs Americans don't want and then return back to their home country. 
    • The legal immigration of Latin Americans to the U.S. needs to be simpler with less red tape.  
    • Border security is also important in two ways. To ensure an orderly process occurs for those wanting to enter the country legally with no one jumping the cue. To also stop drugs, terrorists and gangs from entering the country.
    • Internal security must be vigilante in ensuring farm laborers and others must be legal and companies who facilitate illegal immigration must receive severe penalties including permanent shut-downs of their enterprise.  
    • The reforms need to apply differently to the southern border then to the northern border. There are different issues with Mexico than there are with Canada who is the number one trading partner with the U.S. The U.S. could be hurt economically if they are not careful here. To spend the same amount patrolling the northern border would also be a waste of needed resources and hinder commercial trade. People in Canada are not flocking to the U.S. for jobs. They have plenty of well paying jobs in their own country.
    The country needs to increase it's population by increasing immigration. All of the studies have shown that in North America, throughout it's history whenever there has been a massive  influx of immigrants into the country there have been economic booms. The ignorant continue to assume that new immigrants take away jobs. The facts show this to be a mere creation by those who are prejudice.

    The golden bobble that dangles before Democrats and Republicans is the support of 50 million Latins who can exercise their vote positively for the party that deals with them fairly and honestly.

    Monday, May 23, 2011

    Layton's New Democrat M.P.'s ...Young, Working Class and Idealistic.

    I'm excited to see what's going to happen in the next session of the House of Common's. The N.D.P. has been criticized for their newly elected candidates in Quebec because of their youth, inexperience and lack of ability to speak French (some). Quebecers seem fine with their candidates. The voters in Berthier-Maskinongé  were fine with Ruth Ellen Brosseau who can barely speak a few words in french. Knowing this the voters voted her in anyways. Why shouldn't a "commoner" represent the voters in the House of Commons (or Commoners). I think it's great that the voters were fine with having students and others represent them.



    Not all the newly M.P.'s in Quebec are inexperienced and young.  Hélène Laverdière is a former Foreign Affairs officer who served in several countries. She will make an excellent critic of this portfollio. 
    Alexandre Boulerice of Rosemont-La-Petite-Patrie is a former communications advisor for C.U.P.E.

    Maybe this parliament will be filled with less jaded politicians. A breath of political fresh air could be blowing through this country. We have hopes that the N.D.P. can keep the Conservatives at bay until the next election, after which they will meet their defeat at the hands of the Newbies.




    Saturday, May 21, 2011

    Waterboarding Again? Torture, Is it reliable?

    Here we go again! The defenders of waterboarding are back in the limelight. It's interesting that these ex-Bush-men always seem to argue in favor of water torture (waterboarding) by using pragmatics. They're argument is, "because it works, therefore we should do it" They're consideration of whether it is morally or ethically right does not come in to play. This may be a reflection of their moral compass in general. Violate the law, cheat, torture and even kill to get the job done, seems to be their way.

    The irony is that their pragmatic arguments do not have any credibility. There is no evidence to show that waterboarding or any other form of torture is a credible way of extracting information from a suspect.  There is evidence, however, to say that a variety of torture methods do not produce any reliable ways of getting people to talk (Indiana Law Journal - "Behind This Mortal Bone: The (In)Effectiveness of Torture" p. 18; July 2008) The F.B.I. claims that their more conventional, non-torture, methods of interrogation are a superior method of extracting information from a suspect and in fact it was information gleaned from these methods that produced the most reliable information in finding Osama Bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan.


    These former Bush-men who defend their sacred waterboarding methods are well educated and should know that there is is no evidence supporting this type of torture. So why do they continue to defend it's use and reinstatement? Their desire to normalize this practice may be in part to justify their use in the past and avoid charges of war crimes because they have violated the Geneva Convention. It's important for the present administration to pursue prosecution of anyone in the former Bush administration that were responsible  for ordering the use of such methods.

    Monday, May 16, 2011

    Rape!..."I was drunk and I didn't know what I was doing" - Outrageous

    Superior Court Justice Terrence Patterson struck down a federal law prohibiting an excessive intoxication defense in cases of sexual assault. "I didn't know what I was doing, I was too drunk" is now a valid excuse in rape cases thanks to this judge. This is absolutely outrageous! How is this ruling defending the safety of the public? How is this serving the public? Are judges not public servants? In what way are they contributing to the betterment of our country when overturning a law such as this?
    The Charter of Rights was an amendment to the Constitution and the intention of this amendment was to protect the citizens of the country from harm by other citizens, the government, and the abuse of authority.  In this case the judge has used the Charter to jeopardize the safety of the public and the personal rights of women to live in peace and safety in their communities. When did the legal system abandon it's purpose? When did it abandon common sense? Our country needs massive legal reform. Judges are accountable to no one. Once they're appointed, they are answerable to no one.

    All civil servants should be answerable to the people, just as politicians are. A judge is a public servant and is therefore supposed to serve the public.  It's time we elected our judges. When a judge makes a radical decision such as this the average Canadian is left wondering what is happening in a  Judge's personal life when he makes a ruling in favor of a rapist.