The Danica dilemma, Nascar qualifying and role models...

Dad recently exposed an article which explains that Danica Patrick has already "qualified" for the Daytona 500 and the 4 following races by purchasing the points accrued by another team and driver from last season. I'll link to the article for more background: http://www.crash.net/nascar/news/176382/1/patrick_secures_daytona_500_place.html

Dad is also a part of the Mazda Miata community, and was quick to stir the pot by posting about this practice as it pertained to Danica, whom I'll admit is one of our favourite Motor-Sports topics.

See, Dad is somewhat of a racing purist. He hates schemes that favour one driver over another based on money, hype or financial standing. He dislikes most of the political mumbo jumbo that surrounds most brands of motorsports, in short he misses the days when you raced what you brought and the fastest guy or girl went home with the trophy.

To us, Nascar is one of the worst offenders, with their competition cautions, Luck Dog's, debris-on-the-track-yellows with no debris to be found, but especially a points and qualification system that sees performance in seasons long ago rewarded with grid slots today. Most criminal is the ability to swap past results, and therefore the ability to qualify without performing, to other teams/drivers for financial considerations. In short, there's no guarantee that the cars in the race are the fastest cars/drivers that showed up for the weekend.

My response to this and how it pertains to Danica, and my feelings about her and her hype-machine:

To me the whole system sucks. Danica apologists are quick to point out that Nascar's other poster boy, Dale Earnhart Jr., hasn't exactly been piling up the wins either. I'm a little bit irate at the Jr comparisons. Difference between Dale and Danica is that he's actually won races without having to have everyone else run out of gas. I'll be keeping careful track (may sit down with a pen and paper) of how many times Danica is mentioned and what position she is in.

I don't understand her apologists. I lump them in with the same group that just voted for Santorum in those 3 U.S states and believe in creationism. You put me, with 0 motorsports experience, and surround me with guys like Andretti, give me the best equipment year in and year out and I'll win a fuel mileage race just as Danica did. I feel bad that Simona Di Silvestro who doesn't fill out a drivers suit as nicely as Danica, doesn't retain a full time stylist, make-up artists or schlep around a tanning bed in her motor home. If she did it may be her driving Nascar or for Andretti. She has more talent in her pinky finger the Danica has in her whole body.

I don't want my daughter watching the circus around Danica Patrick, not because I don't want her to have female role models that are in racing. But because I would be ashamed if she ever thought that in order to make it to the top flight of a sport she would have to, unlike the men, be concerned with style, looks or image over results on the track.

Just to be clear, I do not blame Danica for this. This is her way of making millions of bucks and getting the exposure she needs to continue her career, and perhaps have a career post-racing. I blame the society which has made her take on this persona in order to be successful. Whatever she is or isn't on the track, she and her people are shrewd decision makers off of it.

Now that I think of it, forget my ire, let's turn this into a fun drinking game. That way instead of getting upset about it, we'll get inebriated. Every time Danica is mentioned while not in the top 20-Drink. I bet you don't make it 250 miles.

Ten Harper regime abuses of power in ten days

Grabbed this off of the Globe and Mail comment board. Full credit to handle "Conservative Lies" for putting this list together.

The Harper regime’s culture of secrecy and deceit is adding up with ten clear abuses of power in the past ten days alone:

• Hiding corporate tax, mega-prison & F-35 costs

The Harper regime failed to comply with a motion demanding that, by March 7, they provide the House of Commons with details concerning its plans to spend billions of tax dollars on corporate tax cuts, prison expansions and un-tendered stealth fighters.

• In & out election fraud

Stephen Harper’s inner circle stands accused of a $1.2 million scam to break election spending limits and buy more attack ads. Senior Conservatives wired money “in” to local campaigns, transferred the money right back “out” – and now they face serious charges involving potential jail time. When candidates claimed the transfers to get $800,000 more in taxpayer-funded rebates, Elections Canada stepped in.

• “Harper government” edict

Stephen Harper is using public resources for partisan purposes by forcing federal public servants to replace the words “Government of Canada” with “Harper Government.” Canadians know it’s not Harper’s government – it belongs to all citizens.

• Jason Kenney’s “very ethnic” fundraising letter

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney was caught using public resources for polling and marketing a Conservative advertising campaign aimed at what he calls “very ethnic” ridings. Minister Kenney has been exposed for the serious conflict of interest between his responsibility to make fair policies as the Citizenship and Immigration Minister and his political role of delivering the votes of New Canadians.

• Christiane Ouimet’s gag order and severance

After the independent Public Service Integrity Commissioner resigned in disgrace for sweeping aside 228 whistleblower complaints, the Harper regime paid her more than $500,000 and made her sign a gag order. Canadians deserve to know what role the Prime Minister’s Office and the Privy Council Office had in influencing the dismissal of embarrassing whistleblower cases involving misuse of funds without an investigation.

• Bev Oda’s dishonesty

Over 24,000 people signed a petition calling for International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda to resign after she misled Parliament about ordering a ministerial document to be falsified. Even though she faces censure for breaching Parliamentary privilege, Minister Oda refuses to step down or answer questions about her conduct. Instead of saying this dishonesty has no place in Parliament, Stephen Harper continues to shield and even applaud his minister.

• Taking “own the podium” too far

After Stephen Harper spoke at the Celebration of the Year of India event, the PMO tried to muzzle the Leader of the Opposition by removing the podium and ushering the media out of the room before his speech. In the end, it was the Prime Minister who was embarrassed for misusing government resources and treating Canada’s ethnic communities like mere political pawns.

• Blacking out Quebec City arena documents

The Harper regime is so afraid of political fall-out over the Quebec City arena proposal that they’re treating the Quebec City area debate like a national security secret, after blacking out background documents about their position on funding an NHL-calibre arena in Quebec City.

• Diane Ablonczy’s ethics breach

Until she was questioned about it in the House of Commons, Conservative Minister Diane Ablonczy had no idea that she had been fined by the Conflict of Interest & Ethics Commissioner and cited for failing to pay the fine. Ms. Ablonczy is the third Harper Minister and 9th Conservative public office holder overall to be fined by the Commissioner, joining previous wrongdoers like Peter MacKay.

• Lashing out at public servants on F-35s

Conservative MP Laurie Hawn’s recent attack on respected former Assistant Deputy Minister of Defense Alan Williams shows that the Conservatives can only resort to name calling when it comes to justifying their $16 billion, un-tendered fighter jet purchase. A media report over the weekend also indicated that the Conservatives don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to backing up their claims on the purchase or maintenance costs of the F-35.




Looks like we have a federal election in the making. Given the fact that the NDP vote goes soft whenever Harper looks like he's in majority territory any election in this climate would at best give him the status quo and most likely force him from office. Upside being, of course, a Liberal victory. Both options sound good to me right now.

Chalk one up for Democracy.

Today Mr. Milliken, Speaker of the House of Commons, ruled that the Conservative Government does in fact have to abide by the will and demands of Canada's democratically elected parliament. The government must now hand over the un-redacted documents outlining the way Afghan detainees were handled and transferred by the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan.

This must serve as a major blow to Mr. Harper and his party, whom expended ludicrous amounts of political capital to keep the full versions of these documents out of the hands of the opposition parties. In fact, the unprecedented steps taken by Harper, in first ignoring a parliamentary order to produce them, proroguing the parliament of Canada and then attempting to further stonewall by trying to have a former Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci rule on whether the documents should be released leave little doubt that incriminating evidence will be found. A ruling in Mr Harper's favour today would have weakened the very essence of what our soldiers are trying to prop up in Afghanistan- Democracy.

All partisanship aside, this is a victory for Canada's democracy. The ruling clarifies that the Prime Ministers Office cannot ignore the will of the majority of parliament. This or any future governments cannot use national security or confidentiality as a crutch to save itself from political embarrassment or even criminal investigation. The officials that we elect in order to represent us, do in face have the power to do so. This ruling sets the power of the democratically elected majority into stone.

Regardless of which side of the house you're on, that has got to be a victory.


-Son

My letter to my MP Peter Stoffer

Dear Mr. Stoffer,

Allow me to begin this letter by commending the job you do as my Member of Parliament for Sackville-Eastern Shore. I feel you do an exceptional job at representing our riding, especially in this era of partisan politics. I respect you greatly for always doing what's best for us, your constituents, even if that means the occasional disagreement with party lines.

What I wish to write you about has a lot to do with your upcoming caucus meeting in the middle of this month. I'm sure you are aware that Stephen Harpers Conservative Government has announced that they will prorogue the sitting of our Parliament into the first part of March. Although done under the auspices of a completely legal constitutional mechanism, and in order to present new policies and quote "recalibrate the governments agenda", this seems more like a disrespectful "low blow" to Canada's democracy than a simple pause in proceedings.

My reason for wanting MPs on Parliament Hill has nothing to do with MPs somehow having to earn the salaries they make. I have come to the conclusion some time ago that a lot of MPs could serve on boards of major corporations etc, the earnings of which would make the average's MP salary seem paltry. My issue with this prorogation is that the good and necessary work of parliament will be further delayed.

It is interesting that Mr. Harper chooses this time to prorogue parliament. Canadians are still waiting on answers from the House of Commons committee that is working on the Afghan detainee issue. We are awaiting the publishing of a report from Kevin Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, on the fiscal standing of Canada. This report is no doubt going to lead to necessary questions being asked of the government in regards to its spending. Mr. Harper is about to appoint new Senators in an attempt to push through reform of the upper house which will further damage the Atlantic provinces standing within Canada. Also, not to be forgotten, is that the government has not yet needed to answer questions about our shameful lack of action and borderline obstructionism at the recent climate conference in Copenhagen. It seems as if Mr. Harper is more than content to have his MPs enjoy the perks of government (the ability to make spending announcements etc) without the scrutiny of Canada's Parliament to worry about. The "clear and transparent" government Canadians were promised now hides behind an appointed, unelected representative of Her Majesty the Queen who has very little choice about whether to grant prorogations or not whenever Mr. Harper quite literally "calls".

My request to you Mr. Stoffer is twofold. I would very much like you to go to your caucus meeting with the viewpoint that the NDP should join the Liberals on January 25th in the House of Commons. Even if just for pure symbolism, the coverage of Canada's two other federalist national parties attempting to get work done, even without the presence of the government, will be a powerful imagine on the Canadian psyche. Also, subsequently to the resumption of the session, I would like there to be legislation drawn up and introduced limiting the length of time and amount of prorogation's that can occur within a session of Parliament. Sometimes it is expedient and valuable to have prorogation as a tool. This occurs to the best of my knowledge when there are maybe a few days left in a session and the business of government has concluded. Perhaps placing a limit of seven days on further prorogation's would be prudent.

I thank you very much for your attention and thank you again for the great work you are doing for the people of Sackville-Eastern Shore.

Respectfully,

Conservative Party using U.S Republican Playbook.

Just a quick note.

Today in the House of Commons every question directed at both the Minister of National Defense Peter McKay and Prime Minister Stephen Harper regarding the Afghan detainee issue was greeted with a response of: "Asking questions regarding the treatment and potential torture of detainees handed to Afghan officials by the CF means you don't support the troops!". This is eerily similar to the approach used by the Bush White House whenever there were questions about the regimes handling of the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

What a shameful farce this "Most Open and Accountable Government in Canadian History" has become. Unfortunately they have sufficiently stalled, stonewalled and obstructed the search for the truth on this issue to take us into the Christmas break. They are now banking that the average Canadian forgets about this issue over the Holidays, an issue which a recent EKOS pole says is hurting Conservative chances of forming a majority government. Unfortunatly they are probably correct in this assumption as Canadians (even the politically involved) will be focusing on the spring budget and its potential to bring us to yet another federal election.

Today Richard Colvin, a current Intelligence Officer and former diplomat in Afghanistan, testified before a House of Commons committee that Afghan detainees transferred from the Canadian Forces to Afghan officials were knowingly tortured by the Afghan officials and prison system.

To make this worse, Mr Colvin claims, that many of the detainees transferred were actually innocent Afghan civilians. Mr. Colvin goes further to say that his department made the government, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper's foreign policy adviser aware of the situation. They were told in no uncertain terms to stop writing details of torture into their reports and to handle reports of such claims verbally. Also Mr. Colvin claims that his department was told not to report or speak publicly about the deterioration of security in Afghanistan in 2006-2007 even though it was plain to them that things on the ground were getting much, much worse. Mr Harper stood in front of Parliament and the Canadian people and said that Afghan detainees were not being tortured and if there was reason to believe they were that they would not be handed over to the Afghan government. This was plainly either an informed or uninformed lie. Now begins the Conservative smear campaign. Mr Colvin will be attacked both professionally and personally by the Government in an attempt to make this all go away.

The most pathetic part of this is that Harper will most likely win a majority in the next election as the Canadian populace seems to be much more concerned about who plays the best Beatles tune on the piano than human rights. We are supposedly losing soldiers in Afghanistan to make the country a free and better place for its populace. I may be mistaken, but allowing the torture of Afghan civilians to proceed doesn't seem much like nation building to me.


-Son