I’ll have to check these out. I never heard of them either.
What is it with all the hate for the Toronto Star? 
I admit they kind of went overboard going after Rob Ford, but they’re not usually that kind of stupid…
From that article -
The birds may not have my delicious saskatoon berries. 
(I was just kidding, by the way.)
That’s my opinion of the Star, too. Sometimes their sucking up to the Liberal party is a little pathetic, too.
I had Saskatoon Berry perogies at the Berry Barn when I was in Saskatoon.
They were tasty, but I will always prefer the perogies and Zumma Borscht at Taunte Maria’s, YUM!
The Star operates according to the Atkinson Principles:
The actual Principles themselves are explained through the links on the linked page.
Sunnyside residents under water again after heavy rainfall. Poor bastards. 
Shit. Hope everything’s all right for the Stampede! It was very cool to see Col. Chris Hadfield on a horse…
They had to cancel all the concerts that were supposed to be held in the Saddledome, but as far as I know, those were the biggest problems.
Every time I see an interview with Col. Chris Hadfield, I’m more impressed by him. He’s so well-spoken and intelligent and just so…real.
We Sarnians are like that. Just ask Mike Weir or Dino Ciccarelli.
{♫ whistle, whistle …♫}
Is anyone still following the Senate expenses scandal? Perhaps someone can explain it to me because I just don’t get it.
Here’s the latest from CBC.ca:
TLDR version is that Mike Duffy somehow managed to convince the upper echelons of the PMO that his problem was their problem and somehow managed to convince them to foot the bill. And (here’s the part that messes with me) THEY DID!
From what I have read so far, Mike Duffy is for lack of a better term, a self-entitled jerkweed. He’s living high off the hog, claiming as many expenses as he can despite knowing what the rules are and exactly where he is violating them. And he has the gall to go to the government and suggest that they comp him even further because he’s such a great guy! And when it becomes front-page news they cut him a check and tell him to shut up about it.
Why the PMO’s office didn’t tell him to piss up a rope is beyond me. Does he have embarrassing pictures of Stephen Harper or something? How do I get a job where I can rack up almost a hundred grand in improper expenses, get caught, have others pay for it and have others get in trouble for it? I’m in the wrong line of work.
You’re missing the part where his “residence” in PEI is fraudulent to begin with.
Yes.
I seem to remember reading on Mayor Nenshi’s Twitter this morning that there was some minimal flooding in Calgary recently due to a rainfall, but that it cleared up.
Stay safe, Albertans.
We need more Nenshis and Hadfields. We get Duffys, Fords and any number of Montreal mayors. That’s proof that there is no god, says I, or if there is, it is a vengeful god.
Two mayors down in Montreal, and another two mayors down in its suburb Laval. Nice to see the much smaller Laval trying its best to keep up with the big boy.
Basically, Mike Duffy was a huge campaign asset to the Tories. Prior to this he was a guy who could get out the vote and even switch votes; a public face with a populist persona (a bullshitty one, but it worked) and a history of being an allegedly honest newsman. In other words, the Tories owed him big time, and at the time probably thought that if they could make this mess go away Duffy could continue to be a major political asset in the future. HAD they gotten the mess to go away, they could have looked forward to Duffy delivering lots of votes in 2015.
Of curse we NOW know that the best course of action would have been to throw Duffy under the bus immediately. But that’s hindsight; at the time it was coldly logical to try to save him. A political party cannot just fire everyone who gets into trouble or nobody would ever want to help the party. There’s an expectation of some quid pro quo.
The scary part to think about is this; how many Mike Duffys have there been who haven’t been caught? I mean, the Mac Harb case is only one tenth as infamous and it’s happening AT THE VERY SAME TIME even though Harb may have stolen over $200,000.
Here’s what I honestly, truly believe: Senators have been happily stealing money for decades. Not for an instant do I think Duffy, Harb and Wallin are unusual. I bet Senators have been defrauding us for decades, Liberal and Tory alike, to the tune of millions. This is an extension of institutional rot. As my father always said, if you turn on the light in the barn and see one rat, there’s ten. There have been many, many Duffys and Harbs.
That all makes a lot of sense, RickJay. On the plus side, maybe this recent wave of senate scandals will finally force some senate reform.
When I submit expense claims there are two levels of scrutiny before I get my money; one at the management level, and a subsequent one by the finance department. We follow the Treasury Board of Canada rules, and I have no idea why the same level of scrutiny isn’t applied to all levels of government. It sounds like Senators were able to just blindly submit expenses and immediately get reimbursed without any second, or third check of the submission. (I know housing expenses are the larger item here, but travel expenses appear to also be routinely misused.)
I’ll tell you something. If the hotel I’m staying at offers a free continental breakfast as part of the room arrangements, I don’t even consider submitting a breakfast per diem for that day.
It’s not my money for one, and for two if an audit ever uncovered that I was double-dipping on meals I’d me mortified, and maybe fired.
Duffy, Harb, Wallin, et al should know better. Like RickJay says, it’s been like this forever no doubt, and only now are we starting to find out about it. An elected Senate, with terms, would work for me. You don’t like the bastard? Throw him out.
Elimination of the Senate means opening up the Constitution, as far as I know, and that just ain’t gonna happen.
Abolishment of the Senate would mean opening up the Constitution; and I agree that that’s not going to happen.
However, it seems to me that the wording on how people get to be senators is vague enough that reform within the existing constitutional parameters is possible:
“Qualified persons” is key here, I think. There are qualifications listed at s. 23 of the Constitution, but other than those, there is no indication as to how a person is chosen to be a senator. So far, it’s been the PM recommending people to the GG, who rubber-stamps the appointment; but it seems that it doesn’t have to be that way.
There is nothing, for example, to indicate that the people recommended by the PM cannot be elected by the people of the province or region that they will represent. The PM could recommend (sometimes reluctantly, no doubt) those who were elected by the people; the GG could still rubber-stamp the appointment, and we’re still working within Constitutional parameters.
One idea anyway, and there are probably others. But this is an example of one way that senate reform could happen without re-opening the Constitution.
I’ve always said it should be a lottery of everyone who files a tax return. Far more representative than our democracy as it stands.
But then again, I am an idealist.
Hey, I like this idea.
And while we’re at it…
Lower the voting age to 16, or even 14. (What? Are you afraid that the sudden introduction of more teenage voters will skew the election results? How many teenagers do you think are out there anyways?)
Let every registered political party participate in the debates for the Commons. (So some of them have crazy ideas. It should be easy to shoot them down in the debate then, shouldn’t it?)
But them I’m an idealist as well.