Paul Martin Loses Temper in Tonight's Debate

During an exchange with NDP leader Jack Layton, Liberal Leader Paul Martin lost his temper and became angry, arms flailing wildly.

Mr. Layton had questioned Mr. Martin as to his failure to disclose the names of all persons who had donated money to his Liberal leadership campaign prior to his becoming Prime Minister following the resignation of Former Liberal PM Jean Chretien.

This is ironic, since Mr. Martin's own people have been going around slamming Conservative leader Stephen Harper as allegedly being "angry", as if implying that normal people don't get angry, therefore Mr. Harper must not be normal? Well, I would say to the Liberals and to Mr. Martin, since Mr. Martin lost his temper and became angry and agitated so easily at a question also asked of Mr. Harper in the same debate which Mr. Harper answered perfectly calmly that all of his contributors names were voluntarily disclosed by himself, then it would logically stand to reason that Mr. Martin isn't normal. So unless the Liberals wish to concede that Mr. Martin is a wildly angry, abnormal person, they should cease and desist with their assininely childish taunts of "Stephen's angry, Stephen's angry" for once and for all.

See, Liberals are childish. No surprise there, since they govern Canada as would the youngsters in the famous book, "Lord of the Flies".

Paul Martin Praises Alfonso Gagliano: Video Here!

Thanks to fellow blogger W.L. MacKenzie Redux, I am able to direct your attention to a damning video of Paul Martin heaping generous praise upon Alfonso Gagliano, he of AdScam infamy himself.

Martin Plays Dangerous Political Game With Charter, Canadians' Rights, National Unity

In last night's election debate, Paul Martin promised to, if re-elected, crack open the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and rip out the Notwithstanding Clause, the very clause standing between a democracy of the people via elected representatives and an absolute authoritarian partisan-politically-appointed judicial dictatorship.

Paul Martin is playing a dangerous political game. In a desperate attempt to salvage his continually dwindling chances of holding onto power, he's willing to put the rights of Canadians, Canadian democracy and the future of the federation at risk. The removal, or even merely the attempt to do so, of the NWC would set a dangerous precedent. It would send the signal that in Canada our rights are changeable at the whim of a power-mad megalomaniacal egotist hellbent on imposing his wishes and his cronies' wishes on an entire nation of people. It would then mean that any prime minister could undertake to add and subtract rights to and from the Charter if he/she believes doing so will result in increased support in specific areas of the country, enough to win seats sufficient to hold onto power.

Such a move would also spark a constitutional crisis. After all, when the Charter was created, it was only due to the inclusion of the NWC at the insistence of the provinces, who wanted to ensure an emergency mechanism existed to enable a province to override any decision it believed militated against its interests. In fact, the NWC has been used before, by Quebec, as the province wished to "protect" the French language by refusing to acquiesce to federal bilingualism law whose intent it was to "protect the rights" of English- and French-speaking minorities of the federation. Should there be even an attempt to revoke the NWC, the separatist cause in Quebec would almost indubitably be strengthened, likely resulting in another Parti Quebecois majority government in the next provincial election and another separation referendum. Boy-o-boy, did Big Paulie Librano ever deliver a hard slap to the face of Federalist Liberal Premier Jean Charest! Paul Martin has certainly in essence contradicted himself here with respect to his already-laughable claim to be the only federalist leader who can beat the separatists. But then again, he's in total denial as to the fact of his Party's and regime's mountain range of cavalier incompetence, corruption, criminal investigations and so on, which has already caused support for the separatist Bloc Quebecois to skyrocket past 50%. Imagine how much further it might rise should Martin be re-elected and proceed to incise into the Charter and slice out one of its most critical parts. It might kill the patient. Does Mr. Martin realize the danger of his promise?

Of course, Quebec wouldn't be the only province to be angered by such an arrogant affront.

I would suggest Mr. Martin back off and withdraw this assinine idea before he causes any further harm to the Federation.

Martin's Charter Change Idea is Stupid, Undemocratic, Dangerous

Liberal leader Paul Martin in last night's English-language debate, in an act of desperation, tried to stem the tide of support going the way of rival Conservative leader Stephen Harper by declaring that if re-elected, he would abolish the Notwithstanding Clause from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

This is how we know he's lost it.

Without the Clause, the Charter wouldn't even exist.

The Clause acts as a counter to the power of the courts. It prevents the judiciary from overriding the will of the Canadian people via their elected representatives' democratic decisions. As Stephen Harper said in last night's debate, the current system of governance, which includes the Clause, provides a "balance" between the power of Parliament and the power of the courts. This, I believe, ensures that neither can effectively be a dictatorship.

So Paul Martin's idea is not only stupid, but undemocratic and dangerous.

Martin himself has, in fact, declared that he would use the Clause to protect religious freedoms from being taken away by the judiciary. Has he changed his mind? Does he no longer believe in freedom of religion, which the Charter itself explicitly guarantees? This begs the question: does Paul Martin really care about the Charter anyway? Why else is he so eager to muck it up?

Would Paul Martin prefer a Canada in which the judges, appointed by none other than himself, render binding, non-reversible, non-overrulable decisions? This is a dangerous concept, for under such a system, it would be possible, and there'd be no stopping this, for him to somehow interfere with the judiciary in terms of letting his appointed loyalists know his wishes as to what they shall rule.

We can't have that. It would enable the Prime Minister to be a dictator as he already controls the courts via appointing political loyalists with full knowledge of their agendas and reasonable belief that they would follow his lead.

Yes, this is indeed possible. We have already seen that the Liberal Party of Canada and its leaders have been behaving as if they're above the law, above the Charter, above the democratic will of Parliament and of the Canadian people. All the corruption and crime... all the scandals, all the ongoing criminal investigations of Martin's regime, the invisible-to-the-Auditor-General multibilliondollar "foundations" and Crown Corporations which eat up untold billions of our money for heaven knows what sort of things the Liberals have been using it for.

Just forget about Martin. Kick him and his corrupt ruling regime out of power January 23rd and restore Canada to the control of the Canadian people. Place Canada once again on the path to prosperity, security, justice and overall excellence as a federation.

Harper Believes

"I believe, for Canada, the best is yet to come."

-Stephen Harper

Breaking Report: Fighters Escort Airliner to Airport in Florida

Northeast Intelligence Network:

9 January 2005: An analyst with the Northeast Intelligence Network in Jacksonville, reported witnessing a large passenger aircraft, possibly a US Airways jet, being escorted by military fighters into the Jacksonville airport at approximately 3:00 pm today. The Northeast Intelligence Network is investigating this report.

Tory Fiscal Plan Works: Conference Board of Canada

The Liberals' scaremongering smacks of desperation. They offer no evidence to back up their claim that the Conservative platform, to be released this week, would lead to a deficit.

The Conference Board of Canada states:

“...we found that the Conservative Party’s economic platform is affordable in each fiscal year from 2005-2006 through 2010-2011. In each year there is enough fiscal room to pay down at least $3 billion a year in debt, as in the [government’s] fiscal plan.”

The Conference Board also found that there is substantial surplus in the Conservative fiscal plan: “Over the five-year forecast horizon to 2010-2011, the CBoC economic and fiscal outlook suggests that there remains $15.7 billion in unallocated fiscal room, over and above the annual debt payment, which provides further cushion to ensure that deficits do not occur due to adverse economic effects.”

(Emphasis mine)

Read the rest at the link and view the actual PDF letter from the Conference Board.

Liberals Will Get Nasty... Now

That's my prediction. They've seen the voter soundings by pollsters for a while now. They know it's over, most likely. But they don't want to lose for any reason. Therefore the're going to go for broke, perhaps like never before. Kamikaze behavior may manifest. They have everything to lose, after all, and do face the very real prospect of serious criminal investigation and prosecution from a brand new government.

Just watch them...

Avian Flu Pandemic: Bush Acts Proactively, Has Plan. Whither Paul Martin?

Northeast Intelligence Network reports... (read it all):

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says:

"The avian flu bears the potential for societal disruption of unprecedented proportion. Strong partnerships and smart planning will be our best protection against this threat. At the president's direction, we are tapping every capability and expertise within the federal government and among first responders and public health officials to maximize our nation's preparedness."

In the first week of 2006, the United States Government released a planning guide for dealing with the upcoming outbreak of a pandemic. This is located at a highly recommended government web site, which contains the official "What you need to know" information for Americans.

What has the Liberal regime of Paul Martin done in this area to be proactive and protect Canadians from a possible pandemic? Anyone ever hear anything but words, words, words and nothing more?

Well, Liberals of Paul Martin? What say you? Do you care more about power and money than about protecting Canadians from all threats, as is your most critical duty?

Anne McLellan: Corruption on the Campaign Trail?

Troubling information from Stephen Taylor regarding Liberal Anne McLellan's 2004 election expenses. They don't add up.

Why didn't she get taken to task for this by Elections Canada or by the Ethics Commissioner? Did they give her a free pass as long as no one else brought up the subject of the glaring discrepancy?

Did Anne or any of her people notice the discrepancy? If so, why did they do nothing about it, as far as one can tell? In the AdScam era, wouldn't they want to clear up as many suspicious-looking figures as possible?

Anne, can you explain this? Can you prove your explanation? The voters want to know!

Just another serious question for the re-election hopeful. Hopeless, perhaps, more likely?