BLOG THIS | blog.thismagazine.ca: February 2005 Archives

It is with mixed feelings that I note that Marc-Boris St-Maurice, my former leader, has quit as leader of the Marijuana Party and joined the Liberals. Under Marc-Boris' energetic leadership, I was convinced in 2000 to run in the Toronto riding of St-Paul's, against the incumbent, Carolyn Bennett. While I managed to take 514 votes, the good people of Forest Hill didn't seem as offended as I was by things like the APEC scandal, so Ms. Bennett was returned with a healthy majority.

Anyway, on the one hand, I'm glad the Marc-Boris is staying in politics, and that he's given up single-issue politics for a more big-tent approach to things. But, it's a shame the only real option here in Quebec is the Liberals. In his statement, Marc-Boris said "I believe that if any party will ever legalize marijuana in Canada, it is the Liberals."

That's probably right, only in the sense that if pot is ever legalized, a government will do it. And if we have a government, it will, more than likely, be the Natural Governing Party.

But I recall an interesting incident, back during that heady campaign of 2000. I was standing on the corner of Queen and John, waiting with my fellow MPC candidates for my turn at the Speaker's Corner booth, when who should stop on his bike but Jack Layton. I approached Mr. Layton and sounded him out about the pot laws, and he gave me his personal assurance that the NDP supported decriminalizing the wacky weed.

More entries on:

Repent! Or we’ll shoot ourselves in the foot

Posted by john_d at 11:36 AM ET | Comments (7)

No disrespect to the man who holds my ticket out of the second circle of hell, but I am beginning to question the public relations savvy of Dr. Rowan Williams, aka The Archbishop of Canterbury.

At a time when all flavours of Christianity around the world are dealing with various internal intolerances, abuses and squabbles over what, exactly, Jesus would think about this or that sexual practice, the worldwide Anglican Church had a golden opportunity to exhibit their, well, worldliness and find a tolerant inclusive solution to the divisive issue of homosexual clergy and gay marriage. Instead, it would appear, The Archbishop is playing a simple numbers game and caving in to the ‘traditionalists’ within his communion. The US and Canadian wings of the church have been asked to excuse themselves from a key decision making council in the church until at least 2008. This time out is punishment for North American Anglicans’ tolerance for both gay marriage and gay clergy.

North America contains fewer Anglicans than one may find in, say, Nigeria alone (one of the centres of anti-homosexual Anglican sentiment), and represents a relatively puny 4-5% of the total worldwide Anglican population, so it’s not as though their free-loving ways are going to erode the core church values—yet, under pressure, Dr. Williams has agreed to stick the US and Canada in the corner until they, as he said on the BBC, repent.

Repent? What’s next, some smiting? Hello Archbishop, it’s the 21st century calling.

Interestingly enough, English Anglicans have also shown a general tolerance for gay clergy. Put them in the same corner and suddenly the heretics climb to close to 40% of the total Anglican population. Oh, the politics of eternal salvation.

More entries on:

February 26, 2005

Good for Liza

Posted by andrew at 06:00 PM ET | Comments (0)

It kills me to say this, but Liza Frulla has a lot to be pleased about. She did a good job keeping culture away from major budget cuts.

Of course, I'm still waiting for stable funding for the CBC, which Chretien promised, oh, 12 years ago now.

More entries on:

Federalisme Rentable: Landry signs up

Posted by andrew at 02:46 PM ET | Comments (0)

Reading up on a bit of Quebec history a while ago, I came across an interesting comment by an old-school hard-line separatist named Pierre Bourgault. He denounced most Quebecers, including most of his fellow PQ supporters, as being not really committed to sovereignty for Quebec, despite an apparent rise in support for sovereignty.

"I don't believe it," said Bourgault. "They still care too much what the rest of Canada thinks. When you are a true sovereignist, you no longer care what they think."

I've always liked this comment, and I thought about it yesterday as I read in the local papers that support for sovereignty was back up to around 50%. Yet in that same paper appeared a bizarre article, in which PQ leader Bernard Landry denounces Jean Charest for causing a breach in the Canadian federation.

Commenting on Ontario's newfound sense of grievance, Landry said: "Since the Council of the Federation was created, relations between Quebec and the federation have never been so bad, and even between the provinces."

I find the fact that Landry seems to care how things go in the federation touching, though a bit odd. According to his party's official platform, he should want things to go even worse for the federation, since the point of secession would be to destroy it. So why the concern?

The answer is pretty obvious. Landry, like 95% of supposed sovereignists, doesn't really want to separate, because that would spell the end of the billions in bribe money that Ontario's 75 Liberal MPs force the rest of the country into paying to Quebec. But now Ontario is finally getting pissed off, and Landry is worried.

To paraphrase Pierre Bourgault: A true sovereignist wouldn't care for the money. In fact, he would make a point of turning it down. But Landry isn't a true sovereignist -- he's an advocate of profitable federalism, in the Robert Bourrassa mold.

More entries on:

February 25, 2005

We’re not in Kansas… wait a minute…

Posted by john_d at 02:25 PM ET | Comments (0)

I hope Margaret Atwood is taking notes, because I think we’re about to enter The Handmaid’s Tale, part Two—The Empire Strikes Back. Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline , is seeking access to the medical records of late-term abortion patients, with the apparent motive of prosecuting child rapists.

Okay, so he’s a pro-life Republican and, sure, one of the doctors whose files he wants to grab spent $150 grand trying to defeat him in an election. He’s a public servant in a constitutional democracy and we need to assume he’s acting in the interests of the state. Except, doesn’t the US constitution demand that the doctor NOT turn over his records, even and especially to law enforcement?

I watch NYPD Blue—isn’t the excuse that prosecuting criminals under the constitution is 'too damn difficult' generally frowned upon in the land of liberty?

For those without NYTimes access, here is the AP story from the Globe.

More entries on:

February 24, 2005

Still kickin ass

Posted by andrew at 06:56 PM ET | Comments (48)

No, not Motley Crue (though they are coming to Montreal in a few weeks). Warren Kinsella. (Yah, I know, he said he liked the book I half-wrote so it's sucksucksuck from Potter.)

Here's Warren explaining Stephen Harper's job to him

Here's my schedule from my days in the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, circa 1990 to 1993:

1. Get up, have breakfast, go to work and attack the government about everything, using every tool at our disposal.

2. Have lunch with Brian Tobin, David Dingwall and Jerry Yanover, attack the government about everything in Question Period and in the scrums afterwards.

3. Attack the government some more, go home and have dinner.

4. Say nightly prayers, ask God to bring more misfortune to the Government the next day.

More entries on:

Name This Magazine

Posted by patricia at 12:57 PM ET | Comments (12)

So the National Post reports today that Boston's FleetCentre arena, home of the Celtics and the Bruins, has auctioned off 13 days of naming rights -- each for a single day.

Golden Palace.com, a Toronto-based internet gaming site, paid US$35,000 for the first day, and subsequent days have fetched US$2,500 to US$5,000. Owners of the arena have made more than US$80,000.

The arena needs a new name because FleetBoston Financial, for which it had been named, was taken over by Bank of America, which already has its name on an arena.

The name-for-a-day is displayed on arena signs, on its website and on voicemail.

Anyway, all this got me thinking how much bidders might offer for a chance to rename This Magazine for a day. Any takers?

More entries on:

The Wrecking Ball

Posted by patricia at 12:17 PM ET | Comments (2)

Jason Sherman's night of political theatre is returning to Toronto's Factory Theatre on Feb. 28 at 8 p.m. The fall show (see story in This Magazine) sold out in 10 minutes.

www.thewreckingball.ca

More entries on:

Good Morning Springton—are you ready to… talk federal finance!

Posted by john_d at 10:33 AM ET | Comments (2)

What do we need to know about the federal budget on a snowy midweek morning?

A) It was delivered;

#2) the Conservatives are still (astutely) afraid of an election, so they’ll support it and the government will survive.

Enough said. Time to turn the dial away from CBC radio’s endless yammering and enjoy some classic rock. Am I right? Well, if you live in Toronto… not so much.

Over the dying strains of Bad to the Bone by George Thorogood & The Destroyers comes Toronto’s voice of the common folk, John Derringer, Q107’s um, er, opinionated morning guy—and Derringer is a man on a strange and increasingly interesting political mission. He is single-handedly redefining a hugely important demographic through two influentiual media outlets—classic rock radio, and Sun Media, owners of those tabloids of the working class, The (choose your city) Sun (Toronto, Calgary, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Edmonton). Check out Derringer’s take on national daycare here.

This morning Derringer took up well over five minutes of valuable fart-joke time during the drivetime morning zoo slot (between 8:30 and 9 a.m.) just chatting away with the traffic guy (?) about the budget. Keep in mind, this is a show sponsored by donuts shops, power tool companies and a hair transplant clinic.

So, okay, you’d expect a big slam on the Liberals for not delivering more on tax cuts, being out of touch with the little guy, etc. And there was a bit of that, but Derringer saved his big guns for Stephen Harper. “This guy just doesn’t get it,” says Derringer, slamming Harper for being so quick to support a budget that does not address a growing concern among Ontario’s more conservative voters—the unequal federal tax benefit Ontario receives. Which is of course a cause currently fronted by Ontario’s liberal premier Dalton McGuinty. Complicated? You bet.

Time was you could count on the Toronto Sun (and your morning rock dj) to state an uncomplicated conservative position at every opportunity—I believe it was The Sun who recoined the term “Fiberals” and first applied it to Dalton McGuinty’s provincial government. Derringer is complicating that position—actually introducing some subtle analysis. Which I applaud… but does it have to take up that small space I’ve reserved in my life for Powderfinger, by Neil Young?

More entries on:

Budget 2005

Posted by andrew at 09:23 AM ET | Comments (0)

All kinds of fun stuff in the papers today, though the Post is more fun than the Globe. The Post even has a budget ditty, set to the tune of The Gambler. Of course, if you want actual analysis, the Globe has an excellent insert that has helpful graphs tracking revenues and spending, debt and deficit and other sorts of things, going back two decades. The focus, in particular, is on the Headwaiter's now-legendary budget of 1995, which broke the back of the deficit.

Coyne is his usual grouchy self on budget day. Ibbitson wants Dalton to declare a jihad on the Feds. Lawrence Martin continues his dispatches from another planet. Jeffrey Simpson apparently can't rouse himself from his decade-long snooze to say anything. My favourite morning reading was the Globe's two editorials, in which they dump all over Martin for being weak. Check out Norman's Spectator for all the hot links.

But the all-time best comment has to come from Terrence Corcoran in the Post. In his exceedingly ill-tempered report, he rails against what he calls "the false religion of balanced budgets." He says we need to be de-indoctrinated, and face the fact that the major challenge we face is not to balance the budget, but to cut taxes.

It is actually nice to see a conservative finally lay it out so clearly: Conservative calls for fiscal prudence have always been a stalking horse for small government, and the hard right will take fiscal idiocy any day as long as it will eventually deliver us from the evils of the welfare state.

That is why Mike Harris never balanced Ontario's budget, and why George Bush is putting the US into a major fiscal hole, whilst being cheered on by the conservative press and the think-tank crew. Debt doesn't matter as long as you cut taxes; in fact, debt is good, because it cripples future governments and ties the hands of the left.

This isn't a new observation. What is new is that Corcoran is one of the first to admit it so frankly.

Along the way, Corcoran also manages to rewrite every Economics 101 textbook. Getting all worked up over the propsect of a carbon tax, he writes:

"The proposal is based on the false economic theories of 'market failure' and the need to use government-imposed 'market mechanisms' to force people to change their behaviour."

Get that? Market failure is a myth. Thanks to Terrence Corcoran, we now have access to the right's wetdreamscape: Not small government. No government.

More entries on:

February 23, 2005

The Latest American Tragedy

Posted by Lisa at 12:10 PM ET | Comments (4)

I can't believe you guys are spending your time talking about trivial things like Iraq and missile defence when America is in the throws of a huge crisis/scandal. Yes, someone hacked into attention-seeking "socialite" Paris Hilton's TMobile Sidekick and posted her private messages, photos and famous pals' phone numbers on the internet. Ashlee Simpson, Eminem, Pat O'Brien...all their numbers are there.
Poor Paris wonders why her privacy keeps getting invaded. First the sex tape, now this. And thankfully this important story does have a Canadian angle with both Avril Lavigne and Sum 41 singer Deryck Whibley being among the celebs who are now receiving prank calls galore.
K, back to our regularly scheduled programming already in progress.

More entries on:

February 22, 2005

We're In! (just don't tell Quebec)

Posted by andrew at 09:50 PM ET | Comments (5)

When the US was putting together its Coalition of the Willing to invade Iraq, many countries declined to send their military, but offered their full political support. Unique among nations, Canada sent the military, but declined to offer political support. The main reason for this upside-down policy was, of course, Quebec. Jean Charest was in the middle of a difficult election campaign, and Jean Chretien didn't want to give the PQ any ammunition.

Well, thanks to the "controversy" over missile defence, the reality of life under Liberal governments has finally been distilled to its purest, most absurd essence. Today, our new ambassador to the US, Frank McKenna, asserted -- quite rightly -- that Canada had already signed up to missile defence when we agreed to let Norad host the command centre.

Yet, for some reason, the Headwaiter has continued to pretend that he's still thinking it over, while the Opposition has continued to either oppose it (Bloc/NDP) or demand more debate (the Conservatives).

But now, latebreaking news tells us that Canada is poised to reject missile defence. According to cbc.ca,

But federal officials, who wished to remain anonymous, told the CBC's Radio-Canada that domestic considerations may have outweighed pressure from Washington.

What "domestic considerations" might those be? Gee... let me think...

Well, at least we can be pretty sure that Quebec will never separate. Why would they? By electing 21 Liberals (out of 75 seats), Quebec gets to run the whole country. Two questions remain, though:

1. How can Frank McKenna possibly keep his job?
2. How long before the rest of the country separates from Quebec?

UPDATE (Feb 24): In today's Globe, Paul Koring has a very good analysis of what this all means vis a vis Canada/US relations. The best line comes from David Biette, an analyst at the Woodrow Wilson institute:

"He said he wanted better relations with Washington, but he is just unreliable in a different way."

More entries on:

Adrienne Clarkson wants her champagne glass back

Posted by john_d at 10:21 AM ET | Comments (4)

She is proposing a Canada/USA women’s hockey tournament to decide the winner of the 2005 Stanley Cup. Gary Bettman does an income analysis on such a scheme, sees the potential for a huge good-will dividend and broadcasting profits for the NHL, so decides against it.

More entries on:

February 21, 2005

Warren Kinsella gets it exactly right

Posted by andrew at 02:38 PM ET | Comments (2)

We don't need commissions of inquiry: they don't change anything. The best tool for democratic change is a good, old-fashioned general election. Always has been, always will be.

That's from WK's blog today.

I completely agree. Which is why the top of today's Globe and Mail freaks me out:

PM gets pre-budget poll boost

47% of Canadians think the Liberals -- sorry, Team Martin -- deserve to be re-elected?

More entries on:

Hunter S. Thompson: 1937-2005

Posted by mason at 03:37 AM ET | Comments (9)

“I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity to anyone, but they’ve always worked for me.”

New York Times obit (requires registration)

Read Thompson’s final column for ESPN.com’s Page 2.

More entries on:

February 20, 2005

fiction as a winner-take-all market

Posted by andrew at 10:26 PM ET | Comments (19)

The Hollywoodization of the global market in fiction writing continues apace. The good people who run the booker have announced a new, Nobel-ish sort of prize. It will be given every two years, based on an author's entire body of work. It is worth something like $150k Canadian.

Among the people on the first list: Margaret Atwood, Saul Bellow , Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Gunter Grass. My bet is on Roth or Bellow winning, though my personal choice would be Stanislaw Lem.

At any rate, I find these sorts of prizes a bit annoying. The money, while not at Nobel-standards, is pretty high, and almost by definition it will go to someone who doesn't need the money. Now, that alone isn't a reason not to hand out prize money, but it makes me wonder just what the money is actually for.

1. It can't be as an incentive, to attract talent into the writing biz. Nobody would reasonably set out on a career as a novelist in hope of someday cashing in on the $150k, and, again, if you are up for it, almost by definition you no longer need the money.

Besides, all the evidence suggests that there are too many novelists in the world, not too few.

2. Perhaps the prize is to function as a reward, for "service to the arts" or something like that? Perhaps, but that seems a bit weird to me. Isn't it one of the world of literature's central conceits that it is about "art," not commerce? All you ever hear is that writers write "because they are driven to" or some such drivel. Surely, a true artiste, especially one who has proven his or her artistic merit over the length of a career, would be above taking a tawdry cash reward?

3. Maybe the point of the money is to function the way those Macarthur "genius grants" are supposed to work: i.e., it gives you the sort of coin you need to seriously indulge yourself, really let your creativity loose etc.

Could be, though that's hardly the picture of the romantic writer in a garret we've been fed all this years.

Plus, I'm extremely skeptical of the usefulness of the genius grants. If anything, it seems to me that they just tend to convince the recipient that they shit gold bricks. See: the collected works of David Foster Wallace since he received his genius money. That award killed his talent.

4. Prestige? Maybe that's it. After all, part of what makes a Nobel so prestigious is that it comes with a cheque for $800 000 or something like that.

Or is it?

I'd like to see someone start a prize that comes with zero dollars attached. Not even a medal or a trophy. You just get some cheapo certificate, like you got in grade 6 for having perfect attendance or something. The trick would be to make it such a prestigious prize, that the very notion that mere money would accompany it would be offensive.

5. But maybe, in the end, these prizes are all about the money. Maybe Margaret Atwood and Philip Roth and Milan Kundera are just as keen for the green as the investment banker down the street. Maybe they like winning these sorts prizes because of the big pile of cash that comes with it.

I'm happy with that. After all, I heard a story once about the poet Derek Walcott. Apparently, after hearing that he'd won the Nobel prize in 1992, he said: "I'm rich. I'm stinking rich."

Probably an urban legend. But I want it to be true.

More entries on:

February 18, 2005

Canada the Naive?

Posted by john_d at 12:21 PM ET | Comments (17)

Former terrorism-czar Richard A. Clarke’s very scary speculative fiction in the February issue of The Atlantic has been gnawing its way into my brain of late —paranoia r us — and no more so than during my recent travels to and from Ottawa. Hearing Anna Maria Tremonte’s (host of CBC Radio’s The Current) account of her relatively security free flights from the Canadian north this week helped the worry along.

Here’s what I’m talking about — I lived four blocks away from a terrorist attack in Ottawa in March 1985. Armenian gunmen stormed the Turkish embassy on a quiet residential street, killing a Canadian security guard and wounding the ambassador. Later that month, threats by the same group nearly shut down the Toronto subway, as security guards searched garbage containers for explosive devices. Neither of these cities are terrorism virgins. One of them contains our government, and the other is the economic engine of Canada.

How strange a feeling then to be sitting on a train traveling between these cities, a train full of people and luggage that went through exactly zero security checks on the way in. No xrays, no dogs walking past the lineups. Not even the most minimal interview you’d get at any airport. I walked from my cab to my seat on the train with only a hi, how are you from some peppy Via employee. My unexamined luggage was then delivered very efficiently into the busiest commuter hub in the middle of the busiest city in the country, at rush hour.

Anybody else find that just a little bit worrisome? I’m sure someone living in Madrid would find that worrisome. Do we REALLY think no-one with bad intentions hasn’t had a look around Canada’s infrastructure?

More entries on:

Moore v. Bertuzzi

Posted by andrew at 11:42 AM ET | Comments (10)

Ok, so Steve Moore has finally decided that he's going to sue Todd Bertuzzi.

Let's debate.

Be it resolved that Steve Moore is a big whiner who though he could dish it out against Markus Naslund and not receive the standard beating as payback. He broke the code of the game once, and by suing, he's doing it again. He got on the ice and took his chances, and what happened was unfortunate but part of the game.

Ok, I'll take the "con" position. Anyone want to lead off the "pro" side?

More entries on:

The party

Posted by patricia at 11:09 AM ET | Comments (0)

Come out and meet the next generation of journalists next week at a party in support of the Ryerson Review of Journalism.

Students at Ryerson's j-school produce two issues of the magazine each year, both due out in April. Stories this year include a look at the relationship between journalists and the cops, and a profile of Jim Bell, editor of the Nunavut weekly newspaper Nunatsiaq News (and my former boss).

Check out his front page story this week about a botched water recycling project in Iqaluit here.

Party details:
February 24, 2004 at the Rivoli Pool Hall in Toronto (downstairs)
9 p.m. $10 at the door

More entries on:

Even the Economist thinks he's weak

Posted by andrew at 08:41 AM ET | Comments (0)

Paul Martin has acquired a number of unfortunate nicknames over the past year -- The Jellyfish, Blinky, The Headwaiter -- but it appears that one of them will stick: Mr. Dithers.

Canadian papers are falling all over themselves reporting on The Economist's new piece,
'Mr Dithers' and his distracting 'fiscal cafeteria'

"Fiscal cafeteria" doesn't have a great ring to it. I prefer Tom Kent's coinage in last November's issue of Policy Options: "Sugar Daddy Federalism."

At any rate, the Economist piece ends with this bit of hope:

All this means that the budget, on February 23rd, will have unusual political importance. It should allow Mr Martin to set some priorities, rather than responding to those of others.

Funny. That is exactly what I said to my mom last summer, after we'd been discussing how Paul Martin seemed to have no focus, and was determined to be all things to all Canadians. "An election," I said. "That will allow him to set some priorities."

As Paul Wells said ages ago: The man is a senior citizen. He's been this way forever. He's not going to change.

More entries on:

February 17, 2005

or, just get our own celebrities to have more affairs

Posted by john_d at 04:06 PM ET | Comments (8)

Just got back from two icy days in Ottawa where I was privileged to be a block away from Parliament for the historic first defeat of the minority Liberal government’s legislazzzzzzzz, oh sorry, I drifted off for a second there.

Anyway, I was presenting at “Creating Canada,” a symposium sponsored by the Canadian magazine industry to discuss—in front of policy folks—the ins and outs of why Canada’s magazines deliver Cancon better than any other medium (yet still can only claim a 41% market share in their own country). Better than any other medium, you say? Think of the last time you saw a Canadian film playing at yer local big box multiplex.

Mentioned again and again during a daylong session was the fact that whenever you walk into a magazine store, you have to search through the back of the racks to find anything telling a Canadian story. Why? Well, obviously the front of the racks cost big money, and American and British mags can pay the big money. That’s why Brad and Jen’s break-up seems so much more important to the casual observer than does, say, just about anything covered by THIS Magazine.

During a Q & A later in the day, I thought I’d play Mr. Naïve, and floated the idea of Heritage simply sponsoring legislation to reserve a portion (or all) of the front shelves of magazine racks for Canadian publications. A sort of a Cancon requirement, like that used for radio airplay.

Predictably, the free marketeers in the room pointed out that the racks are privately owned and should be left to make whatever money they can by whatever means. Fair enough, but these same free marketeers had no problem asking for public money to better compete in buying those premium placements on the racks. If we really were to leave this important Canadian cultural industry to sink or swim on its own in a wide-open marketplace, I predict the sinking option – so, what’s wrong, exactly, with forcing People Magazine to back off my sightlines a bit so I can get a better look at Geist?

Flagpoles can also be privately owned, but isn’t there some insistent little requirement to fly the maple leaf higher than, say, anything else?

More entries on:

Long Live the new Post

Posted by andrew at 09:53 AM ET | Comments (8)

It has been less than a week, but I'm in love with the National Post, under new editor Douglas Kelly. Their coverage of the NHL cancellation today is outstanding, and overall the Post is absolutely destroying the Globe and Mail in every area, except Arts coverage. (The Post's Arts section remains iredeemably trashy.) It can't hurt that they have Dianna Symonds on board as associate editor.

Two good pieces in the op-ed section (now called Issues and Ideas), although both are a bit late to the game. For example, Don Martin gives the Headwaiter a "dither rating" on a handful of files. I seem to recall running a ccntest on this a few months ago.

Meanwhile, William Watson has a good piece on the absolute hypocrisy of the federal approach to Kyoto. His basic point is sound: If the feds are as concerned about global warming as they claim to be, why on earth is it being left to Rick Mercer to exhort us to act?

I made this same point in Saskatoon last week. During question period after my Rebel Sell talk, a student asked me what was wrong with individualised forms of consumerist political action. The problem, of course, is that it permits the moral to be exploited by the immoral. Sure, you are a good person and buy fair trade coffee. But what about the thousands who don't care? Why are issues of profound political importance being left up to individual discretion?

Imagine if, instead of making discrimination on the basis of race illegal, they simply hired a Luba Goy to do an ad exhorting whites to treat blacks with respect. It would be outrageous. Yet somehow, the Liberals seem to think that global warming is my personal responsibility -- I need to meet the One Tonne Challenge.

Stephane Dion claims that stopping global warming is a matter of utmost urgency. So why is it being treated by the Liberals as the moral equivalent of Participaction?

More entries on:

February 16, 2005

bastard

Posted by andrew at 01:27 PM ET | Comments (12)

More entries on:

If you live in the T-dot

Posted by Lisa at 12:18 PM ET | Comments (0)

If you live in Toronto you should check this out....Good music, a good cause...Ain't nothing better than that.

"Welcome to our Living Room"

A Benefit for the Toronto Public Space Committee

an evening of seven solo performances by:

Sarah Harmer
Bob Wiseman
Jason Collett (broken social scene)
Andre Ethier (deadly snakes)
Magali Meagher (the phonemes)
Gentleman Reg
Andrew Whiteman (apostle of hustle)

bloor cinema * february 18 * $14
doors at 8pm * show at 8:30pm

http://www.publicspace.ca/

===========================================
Please join us for an evening of beautiful voices and urgent politics. Sarah Harmer and six Toronto indie artists will welcome you to our Living Room to raise funds and awareness about Toronto's anti-postering bylaw and the continuing commercialisation of our city's public spaces.

Three years ago, Toronto City Council tried to pass a bylaw that would ban public postering on 99% of all utility polls. Posters are an important part of any community, an expression of a vibrant culture and a right that must be defended. The bylaw was successfully opposed by a coalition of community and arts organisations but has now resurfaced and is being championed by City Councillors who see freedom of expression as 'clutter'. If posters are banned while commercial ads continue to appear on billboards, buildings, buses and garbage bins then public space is no longer ours, but the private realm of advertisers. Let's reclaim the streets.

Tickets at: The Bloor Cinema, Toronto Womens Bookstore, Soundscapes, Another Story Bookstore, Rotate This, Sonic Temple

More entries on:

February 15, 2005

A Tuesday Morning Rib Tickler

Posted by mason at 11:48 AM ET | Comments (0)

Q: How many Bush administration officials does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are a delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?

More entries on:

Happy Flag Day

Posted by andrew at 09:32 AM ET | Comments (2)

Shouldn't today be a holiday?

More entries on:

February 14, 2005

So Happy Together

Posted by Lisa at 05:45 PM ET | Comments (0)

I've been meaning to post this for a couple of weeks now, but I've been a wee bit busy learning about this thing called magazine publishing. Yup, I just wrapped up my third week here at This Magazine and I just wanted to thank all the staff, Board, contributors, volunteers and This Mag supporters who have been so nice and welcoming since I started at the mag.
I kinda look at This Magazine as my new boyfriend since we're embarking on this new exciting relationship together. Like all new relationships, we're spending lots of time together (perhaps a little too much) and getting to know each other. Unlike past boyfriends, however, this one looks damn good on paper. But, I digress.
I'm really excited to be here and look forward to settling in and continuing the fine work that Joyce did. Please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to hearing from you and as Joyce said in her post a couple of weeks back, please do not hesitate to buy me a beer if you see me. It need not be an import, I'll drink the cheap stuff too. I figure if I have a couple of beers I might be able to suppress the memories of last night's Grammy Awards. What fresh hell was that?

More entries on:

Drinks Are Served!

Posted by andrew at 11:52 AM ET | Comments (0)

Another triumph for the Headwaiter!

More entries on:

February 13, 2005

Quebec Statistic of the Day

Posted by andrew at 08:16 PM ET | Comments (0)

Is a high abortion rate a sign of social decay? Or is it a sign of progressive social policy with respect to freedom of choice and access? Or none of the above?

These sorts of questions went completely unasked in the english-Canadian press this weekend. On Friday, Statscan released a study which reported the seemingly innocuous fact that

Canadian women obtained 105,154 abortions in 2002, down 1% from 106,270 in 2001. The rate of abortion has also marginally fallen from 15.6 abortions per 1,000 women in 2001 to 15.4 abortions per 1,000 women in 2002. These numbers exclude data related to residents of Nunavut.

Almost every report I could find in english media more or less just reprinted this press release. In contrast, La Presse made it an issue of some concern. Why? Because in Quebec, close to one out of every three pregnancies ends in abortion. To find that out, you have to dig a bit through the tables that Statscan provides, to get a breakdown of the ratio by province.

Quebec's rate of 42.6 abortions per 100 live births (La Presse reported it as 43.7, though I can't find where they got that figure) is the highest in the country. BC has the next closest, at 39.9, while PEIs is 9.8.

So, does this mean anything?

According to nurse Carole Vallee, who works at an abortion clinic in Laval, "Ce que disent les statistiques, c'est que les services d'avortements sont plus accessibles au Quebec qu'ailleurs au Canada."

That is: Quebec's high abortion rate is a sign that it is simply more accessible in Quebec.

Laura-Julie Perrault at La Presse has actually done her homework, and found that this rate in Quebec

"classe la province dans le meme club que le Vietnam, la Hongrie, le Kazakhstan, la Lituanie et la Moldavie, plutot que dans le groupe des pays industrialises comme la France, les Pays-Bas et les Etats-Unis."

Are Lithuanie and Moldavia more progressive on the abortion front than France and Holland? Maybe, what do I know. But I'm skeptical.

More entries on:

pistols at dawn

Posted by andrew at 09:55 AM ET | Comments (23)

The Warren-Kinsella-against-the-world show continues, with a new player upon the stage, Andrew Coyne.

To quickly recap: Coyne wrote a very good piece in yesterday's Post summarising the motherlode of BS that Crouton and the Headwaiter are asking us to believe about the "Sponsorship Program" (which, depending on whom you ask, either did or did not exist before the year 2000).

Warren took exception to a sarcastic but, IMO, fairly mild comment Coyne made about Warren's role in the appointment of M. Guite in 1997. WK fired off a letter to Coyne, then a column to the Post, responding to Coyne's claims. Coyne then fired up his long-dormant website to respond to Warren. Each, meanwhile, is CCing/BCCing their stuff to Editors, Spectors, and then sticking it all on their blogs.

Vague threats about libel lawyers getting involved continue to be made.

Paul Wells cheers them on, between sips on his slurpee.

Canada needs more of this. In the absence of hockey, this sort of old-fashioned donneybrooking is extremely good for the national spirit; it is nice to see that raw partisanship flourishes outside the GM Place or the Bell Centre.

Now, I know Coyne won't like this interpretation. He would complain that I'm simply feeding the unhappy view that this is all a "game", with no consequences beyond the "theatre" of it all.

Not so. I believe that the Gomery inquiry, and Chretien's ongoing disregard for the constitution, the rule of law, and rules in general, and his nonstop desire to help his friends and harm his enemies, have made it certain that history will not look well on his premiership. From APEC to BDC to Gomery, Chretien has shown no desire to take responsibility for actions which, in an ideal world, would see him jailed. I take this very seriously.

But I also believe that the best way to ensure responsible government is through strong, responsible opposition. If Mulroney wasn't such a big tool, if Manning hadn't been such an Ottawa-hating westerner, and if Bouchard hadn't been such a back-stabbing traitor to his friends and his country (so much for having to choose), that is to say: If the Conservatives hadn't gone from majority status to two seats, then Crouton wouldn't have been given a free ride for ten years.

Which is to say: If you want to blame anyone for the Chretien years, you should blame anyone but Chretien. Blame the bozos who permitted the Bloc Quebecois to form Chretien's first Official Opposition.

That's why I'm delighted to see the lads getting mud on their pantaloons.

More entries on:

February 10, 2005

Write if you find work, Lucienne

Posted by andrew at 06:47 PM ET | Comments (8)

Lucienne Robillard is Canada's Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs. What sort of stuff does that involve? Well, it took me a while to find out. That's because, if you go to the Government of Canada website and click on "Departments and Agencies", and poke around the A-Z listings, you'll find links to plenty of interesting sites. Like, the online Currency Museum. Or the Portrait Gallery of Canada.

But alas, no link to the department of intergovernmental affairs. I guessed maybe it is because it isn't that important. But I finally found it (Thanks, Google!) -- it's part of the Privy Council Office. Fair enough -- but it isn't like that is totally obvious.

Anyway, check out the sorts of stuff they are responsible for, on the left side of this site:

- The financial framework of the federation
- Intergov relations in numerous sectors
- the ongoing evolution (Hello, Nunavut!) of the federation
- the constitution
- national unity

Big stuff huh? Since the summer, the Prime Minister has been remaking this federation in numerous ways, to the point that many commentators have suggested that he's implemented "Meech by stealth," that he's
granted sovereignty-association to Quebec, and that he's turned Ottawa into the provinces cabana boy. That is to say, lots of action on the "intergovernmental" front.

So, what's Lucienne been up to?

Not much.

Seriously.

Meanwhile, here's what Dion was up to.

Surf around this site for a bit. It's pretty clear that Lucienne has been doing sweet bugger all, at a time when this federation is going through it's most fundamental changes in a decade.

More entries on:

Better than hockey

Posted by andrew at 11:35 AM ET | Comments (2)

I remember, long ago when there was hockey in the land, watching the Leafs play the Habs. I was a Habs fan, my roommate loved the Leafs. It was the early 90s. Toronto was kicking the stuffing out of Montreal in this game, and things were getting chippy. A scuffle broke out, and suddenly there was Wendel Clark taking on one, no two, no three! Canadiens. He fought them all and won. And I think he had also scored in that game. As he skated off to the penalty box, he had this look on his face, like, "Do I have to do Everything Around Here?"

My roommate danced around the room like he'd won the Lotto. I fumed.

Much like Stephen Harper must be fuming today. There's Stephane Dion in today's Globe, challenging Harper to a debate over the constitution and same sex marriage. Anywhere, anytime, in either language.

How cool is that?

Remember, Dion is our Environment Minister. So now he's doing Irwin Cotler's job for him. This, after he's spent the better part of the past year doing Lucienne Robillard's job for her.

Step aside, headwaiter. You've served enough drinks.

More entries on:

February 09, 2005

Runnin' back from Saskatoon

Posted by andrew at 09:57 PM ET | Comments (8)

Just back from 4 days in Saskatoon, where I gave a couple of talks at the University of Saskatchewan. It was lefty-groupie heaven; as two female students were showing me around, we walked right past Roy Romanow, who is teaching there right now. The students got all giggly. On my flight back today, Stephen Lewis was sitting up front in executive class, reading the NY Times.

Some things I didn't know:

1. John Diefenbaker is buried, along with his wife Olive, on the USask campus, on a high bank overlooking the South Saskatchewan River.

2. Diefenbaker gave natives the vote, gave Canadians a Bill of Rights, and appointed the first french-Canadian GG. (Well, I knew about the Bill of Rights.)

3. The South Saskatchewan river is so Mighty that it doesn't freeze over, even though it regularly hits -40 in Saskatoon.

4. The USask campus includes the Canadian Light Source, a totally wicked synchrotron that lets us see "the microscopic nature of matter, right down to the level of the atom."

5. Saskatoon has a Lululemon and many Starbucks, but no Chapters.

6. If you try ordering a Molson Export in Saskatoon, the bartender will say to you, "where are you from, Montreal?"

7. In Montreal, there are establishments in which you can hold a beer in one hand and a stripper's breast in the other as she grinds her bum into your crotch. In Saskatoon, it is illegal to serve beer in the presence of naked women.

8. Most of the students I spoke to at USask took it for granted that they would be leaving for Calgary once they graduated, much the way McGill students automatically decamped for Toronto when I was there in the early 1990s.

9. There is a farm on campus, with cows, grain silos, the whole shebang.

10. There is a rather large bust of Gandhi across from the main shopping mall.

More entries on:

February 07, 2005

I hope I don't get fired for posting this....

Posted by annette at 05:07 PM ET | Comments (2)

Looks like another journalist has been sacked for having an extra-curricular blog. I think the This Magazine office is a little too small for me to anonymously chronicle everyone's behaviour..."the indie-rock loving publisher, the ageless art director, the editor with the Thai cuisine addiction..."

More entries on:

February 06, 2005

Support Equality

Posted by mason at 04:35 PM ET | Comments (22)

Here is the letter I sent today to the MP of Parkdale-High Park, Sarmite Bulte:

Dear Ms. Bulte,

I am writing today to voice my strong beliefs on the issue of same-sex marriage, and to urge you to support Bill C-38 in the House of Commons. I understand you are on record as a supporter of equal rights for same-sex couples, and for that I am appreciative. It is good to know my representative in Parliament believes that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to all Canadians.

I know there have been loud denouncements of this bill by opponents of equality, and while I understand the difficulty to accept change, I would like to reject the notion that same-sex marriage jeopardizes the family structure. Gay and lesbian couples are just as capable, if not more capable in some cases, of raising children to be responsible, concerned citizens with good values. Contrary to the arguments made by opponents of this legislation, marriage is a social construction, and as societies evolve and become more accepting it should be made available to all, regardless of sexual orientation.

The majority of Canadians do not feel threatened by extending marriage to gay and lesbian couples. On the contrary, the ability of Canadians to recognize the basic rights of all people is a national treasure. On the radio recently I heard the story of a woman from New York who visited Vancouver in 2003 to be married to her same-sex partner. She related how she was approached in the park after the ceremony by locals who were curious about the wedding, and who told her how proud they were that a lesbian wedding could take place in Canada. I feel the same way, and I hope you will vocally support Bill C-38 in the House of Commons, without amendment.

Thanks for your support.

Mason Wright

Parkdale

Obviously this is an important issue to speak out on—many anti-equality groups are able to make their views known through well-organized and well-funded rallies, not to mention a sympathetic ear from certain media organizations.

I urge all readers of this site to read more about Bill C-38, and to visit the Canadians for Equal Marriage website to find out what more you can do to help ensure this legislation passes.

More entries on:

Runnin Back to Saskatoon

Posted by andrew at 10:22 AM ET | Comments (2)

Here's a lovely piece from today's CBC Montreal:

Smog warning remains in effect
MONTREAL - A thick winter smog blanketing southeastern Quebec is unlikely to lift before next week.

That's my cue to get out of here. I'm off to Saskatchewan for a few days. Have a good week everyone.

(P.S. Hey Joyce, want to meet for a drink in Lloydminster?)

More entries on:

February 04, 2005

Superdupersize Me

Posted by andrew at 11:41 AM ET | Comments (0)

So much for the thesis that healthy was the new unhealthy.

From Brand Autopsy:

According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, 'Burger sales at the roughly 2,050 Hardee's outlets have climbed 20% since the 2003 introduction of the first Thickburgers. CKE (owner of Hardee's) has posted 19 consecutive months of same-store sales growth, after years of the opposite.' And the company's stock price has zoomed to near $15.00 a share, up from a low of $3.69 two years ago.

Any chance Morgan Spurlock will take on Hardee's?

More entries on:

Upside Down World

Posted by andrew at 10:44 AM ET | Comments (0)

So let me get this straight: Paul Martin goes to Newfoundland to do a radio show, and gets, not praise, but an earful from the people to whom he has just handed $2 billion of other people's money.

Meanwhile, the guy who extracted that cash by hauling down the Canadian flag goes to Toronto, and gets a standing ovation at the Empire Club? Because -- get this -- the Bay street honchos think he's a guy to do business with.

Where do the members of the Empire Club think that $2 billion came from?

More entries on:

February 03, 2005

Negotiations, Ottawa-style

Posted by andrew at 10:15 AM ET | Comments (10)

I'm sure you are all wondering how negotiations between Ottawa and Quebec City are going over the parental leave file. Last time we looked at the file, Ottawa was offering $375 million, and Quebec was demanding $750 million.

Has either side moderated its position? You have to dig into Le Devoir to find that -- Quelle Surprise -- Ottawa has upped its offer to Quebec over funding its Bigger and Better parental leave plan. They are now offering $475 million.

See how easy it is to negotiate with Ottawa? Just wait a few days, keep repeating your initial negotiating point, and $100 million just magically appears on the table.

Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
No.
Can we go to Itchy & Scratchy Land?
OK!

UPDATE: Paul Wells suggests today that Quebec has actually moderated its position somewhat. That's true, in the sense that Charest has stopped demanding what the PQ did, which is that the rest of Canada pay for its superior parental leave programme. But that hardly changes the fact that, on the negotiating points that Charest himself adopted, Quebec hasn't budged while Ottawa continues to cave.

The rest of Well's post is very good though.

More entries on:

Quebec rejects asymmetricalism

Posted by andrew at 10:00 AM ET | Comments (0)

Last week on This blog, we looked at how Quebecers had risen up against their government's decision to allow jewish private schools the right to opt-out of a public programme, with full compensation. I suggested that in this case, the people of Quebec were denying to the jewish community a right that Quebecers themselves had demanded, and recieved, from the rest of Canada.

One interesting thing about that was that a number of greek private schools in Quebec had been receiving full funding for the past 20 years. So, it would seem that what's good for the Greeks is not so good for the Jews.

Of course, it was clear that this introduced a visible imbalance into the education system. Let's call it "asymmetrical educationalism." Quebec being fond of distinct treatment for distinct groups, you'd think they'd be happy to let the imbalance stand.

Apparently not:

Province rethinks funding of Greek schools
QUEBEC CITY - Several weeks after backtracking on funding for Jewish private schools, the Quebec government is now taking another look at its full-funding of Greek schools

More entries on:

February 02, 2005

and you thought Canadian politics was funny

Posted by john_d at 10:27 AM ET | Comments (1)

Making the unique political promise of “No more lies, evasion, [and/or] spin,” potentially insane former talk-show host Robert Kilroy-Silk launched Britain’s newest political party today.

Wait a second, is it April 1st? No, must be for real. For a good laugh, see the Guardian article here.

Unconfirmed rumours suggest the party name “Veritas” was originally going to be “Canadian Reform Alliance Party,” but then it was pointed out to Kilroy-Silk that he is not Canadian. He certainly has the Stockwell Day look and feel to him, doesn’t he, what with the prop “list of government lies” and all?

Update from further reading

The eerie similarities to Stockwell Day continue. Remember Mr. Day being hit in the suit with a carton of chocolate milk? Here's the British version:

Mr Kilroy-Silk, who recently quit the UK Independence party, was arriving at Manchester High School for Girls to take part in a radio programme.

As he was walking towards the entrance at around 7.15pm, a bucket of manure was thrown over him.

More entries on:

Sur-fricking-prise

Posted by andrew at 09:37 AM ET | Comments (0)

Offshore deal prompts Saskatchewan to seek similar pact

Emboldened by the success of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia wrestling their offshore oil revenues from the federal government, Saskatchewan is pressing Ottawa for a similar deal for its energy resources.

Instant Update: Paul Wells beat me to it.

More entries on:

February 01, 2005

the beautiful mess of democracy

Posted by john_d at 11:37 AM ET | Comments (9)

Just taking a moment today to note two things this blog might be tempted to ignore:

1) A very real and triumphant story of democracy in action in Iraq. There’s no hiding from it just because we don’t like the path we all had to take to get there. I wouldn’t go to vote if I thought I might die doing it. Therefore, I have no choice but to admire all those ordinary Iraqis who braved violence for what must surely remain an abstract idea in their lives. The link above is to a BBC election log full of real people saying real things, like this:

Though I believe strongly that force is never the way to bring about democracy, still I watched all the many, many Iraqis walking quietly - some for long, long distances - to cast their vote and I wept. I sincerely hope and pray that this will be the beginning of the end of the occupation and that all of you Iraqis will soon have better lives.
RM, Columbus, Ohio, USA

and b) the existence of intelligent, compassionate, conservative thinking in the United States. David Brooks waxes poetic on the Iraqi election... and it gets me. Nice work Mr. Brooks.

More entries on:

What Canadian Flags?

Posted by andrew at 09:57 AM ET | Comments (14)

Can Paul Martin be stopped?

In a comment two posts down, the insightful John_D finds my arch-Trudeauvianism (Trudeaupianism?) delightfully amusing. I'd be more amused -- and delighted -- if I weren't one of about five Trudeauvians left in the country. One such fellow-traveler is Allan Gregg, who has the cover story in the new issue of The Walrus. The piece is called "Quebec's Final Victory", and here's the blurb:

Pierre Trudeau tried to stop a cycle of blackmail, where one province held up the national interest by bargaining solely for its own parish. Paul Martin's new health health accord is an invitation not just for one blackmailer, but ten.

He's exactly right, of course. The predicable blackmail started almost immediately, with Danny Williams of Newfoundland doing his best Levesque impression all Fall, right up until last week when the Headwaiter finally caved over offshore oil. Word is that the senior bureaucrats were in full damage control right up to the end, but ultimately the Headwaiter prevailed in his determination to serve drinks in St. John's.

If he can't stand up to Newfoundland, do you think there is any chance he'll be able to say Non to Quebec? The Feds are currently at a negotiation impasse with Quebec over parental leave. Basically, here's the situation: In 1997, Ottawa set up a national parental leave programme funded through EI. It is a GREAT PROGRAMME. Quebec, of course, resents Ottawa doing something useful, and is currently challenging Ottawa's constitutional authority to run this programme -- the Supreme Court will be getting back to us on this shortly.

Meanwhile, Quebec has decided to set up a BETTER programme, with LONGER leave and NO TWO WEEK WAITING PERIOD. Good for them, no? Except Quebec wants the Federal government to pay for the extra benefits.

That's right: Quebec wants Ottawa to offer more generous funding to Quebec than to the rest of the country, for a programme that it is simulatenously challenging as unconstitutional.

In a real country (or, even one run by someone like Jean Chretien), the Prime Miinister would tell Quebec to F*** Right Off. But no, instead, the Feds have been "in negotiations" with Quebec since last May, with a deadline of today to reach an agreement. Of course, now there is a crisis. Quebec has decided that Ottawa owes it $750 million in "start up money", i.e. money to start a programme in Quebec that already exists nationally. Ottawa has -- astonishingly -- offered $375 million. But that isn't good enough... Quebec is threatening to walk out on the talks (SOUND FAMILIAR?), and is complaining that, without the full three quarters of a billion, they won't be able to get the programme running on time or provide the benefits they want.

And get this. The Quebec Minister on the file, Claude Bechard, said yesterday that the Federal intransigence has gone on long enough: "I'm giving them a last chance," Bechard said. "There's still a few hours left."

This is what will henceforth be the negotiating technique known as The Full Williams. Hear that Ottawa? This is your last chance to give us the money, or... or... or what? We won't set up our version of a programme that already exists? Or... we'll take down the Canadian flags?

What Canadian flags.

The cover of the new Walrus has the headline: Quebec is Gone. But it isn't Quebec that is gone. It's the federal government.

More entries on:

Previous month: January 2005
Next month: March 2005

THIS MAGAZINE. BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL

Please note that all writers hold the copyright for their pieces and it is illegal for any portion of them to be copied or distributed without their expressed permission. So please don't steal.

THIS MAGAZINE: BECAUSE EVERTHING IS POLITICAL

February 28, 2005

M. St-Maurice goes to Ottawa

Repent! Or we’ll shoot ourselves in the foot

February 26, 2005

Good for Liza

Federalisme Rentable: Landry signs up

February 25, 2005

We’re not in Kansas… wait a minute…

February 24, 2005

Still kickin ass

Name This Magazine

The Wrecking Ball

Good Morning Springton—are you ready to… talk federal finance!

Budget 2005

February 23, 2005

The Latest American Tragedy

February 22, 2005

We're In! (just don't tell Quebec)

Adrienne Clarkson wants her champagne glass back

February 21, 2005

Warren Kinsella gets it exactly right

Hunter S. Thompson: 1937-2005

February 20, 2005

fiction as a winner-take-all market

February 18, 2005

Canada the Naive?

Moore v. Bertuzzi

The party

Even the Economist thinks he's weak

February 17, 2005

or, just get our own celebrities to have more affairs

Long Live the new Post

February 16, 2005

bastard

If you live in the T-dot

February 15, 2005

A Tuesday Morning Rib Tickler

Happy Flag Day

February 14, 2005

So Happy Together

Drinks Are Served!

February 13, 2005

Quebec Statistic of the Day

pistols at dawn

February 10, 2005

Write if you find work, Lucienne

Better than hockey

February 09, 2005

Runnin' back from Saskatoon

February 07, 2005

I hope I don't get fired for posting this....

February 06, 2005

Support Equality

Runnin Back to Saskatoon

February 04, 2005

Superdupersize Me

Upside Down World

February 03, 2005

Negotiations, Ottawa-style

Quebec rejects asymmetricalism

February 02, 2005

and you thought Canadian politics was funny

Sur-fricking-prise

February 01, 2005

the beautiful mess of democracy

What Canadian Flags?