Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« December 19, 2004 - December 25, 2004 |Main| January 2, 2005 - January 8, 2005 »

Saturday, January 01, 2005

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of: NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

US papers lead with President Bush’s ten-fold increase in US aid to victims of the tsunamis. The death toll now stands at 140-150,000 and it could go higher.

In the UK, the Deputy Prime Minister is defending Tony Blair’s decision not to return from vacation. British troops have brought peace to one corner of Iraq.

Freedom of Information legislation comes into force today. The Brits are giving generously.

In France, President Jacques Chirac has announced that the EU referendum will take place by mid-year. And he’s plumping for a permanent UN humanitarian rapid-reaction force.

At home, the Prime Minister arrives home today—red-faced if not tanned.

Yesterday, in Morocco, he signed Canada up to the US-led international disaster-relief coalition. DART is now standing-by.

Back in the USA, the New York Times goes below the fold with Ukraine, and chases yesterday’s Post story on the US’s new torture rules.

The Washington Post fronts a report from Indonesia’s Aceh province, along with a planned election-style campaign for Social Security reform. Bats are being made mince-meat by wind turbines.

The Los Angeles Times fronts same-sex divorce, but no same-sex marriage, in California —as of today. The Chief Justice is concerned about judicial independence.

The New York Times’ editorial board reflects on the new year, and explains why Americans must get serious about energy conservation. David Brooks explains why we should be mourning.

The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board serves up its New Year’s wishes. The Washington Post’s editorial board is onto the dangers of fingerprinting. Former ambassador Steven Pifer says the US must assist Victor Yuschenko.

Here at home, the Toronto Star editorial board says Canada must offer more aid to Asia, and the Martin government should ask itself some questions about its performance.

The Star fronts missing Canadians, missing foreigners in Thailand and the generosity of Torontonians. Martin Regg-Cohn reports from Sri Lanka.

Inside, we learn that Canadians are giving generously. And that the US is trying to mend fences with its huge increase in aid.

From the UN, Stephen Handleman reflects on the development challenge. From Toronto, Ian Urquhart outlines Dalton McGuinty’s challenges in 2005.

We also learn that New Year celebrations in Toronto and elsewhere were muted. In the Sun, by contrast, Torontonians were celebrating.

The Globe and Mail fronts a Vancouver man in Thailand looking for missing relatives, the latest figures on the death toll--including Canadians who may have perished—and Doug Saunders, who finally landed in Sri Lanka after missing his plane connections.

Inside, Rick Salutin remembers a friend who became a school principal:

“Why are the most acclaimed, esteemed, "successful" people, often not very impressive: CEOs, opinion-makers, political leaders. Why do they seem less worthy and less alive than many folks you know on your own block, whom you'd probably rather be seated beside on a long flight?

I'm guessing it's because to "rise" through the hierarchy you must leave real people in real communities behind. When Bob White resigned as the dynamic head of the Canadian Auto Workers to become president of the Canadian Labour Congress in Ottawa , he seemed to lose his vitality and sense of centredness. What he had really lost was the regular contact with his community, the union members. My friend Sam Gindin, his trusted adviser, chose to stay with the CAW, not because he thought the Ottawa work was unimportant but because he didn't want to lose "the contact." Joe Carlino moved "up" out of classroom teaching early in his career, but never went "above" the level of principal, although I imagine he could have. It would have meant losing contact with the actual members of school communities.

So a superb teacher might be reluctant to leave the classroom and lose the contact, while a mediocre one might happily rise through the admin ranks and not even know what he was missing -- ever upward to director of ed, CEO, prime minister, etc. Eventually they are surrounded by similar types.”

Rex Murphy weighs in on the disaster:

“There is a chasm between us on our side of the world, with all our wealth and its narcotic amusements, and "them" on their side, that is deeper than ideology, deeper than politics, and deeper than we on this side have the nerve to contemplate.

I would be reluctant to sift any "message" out of this week's catastrophe, but if there is one to detain us it is surely that the inconceivable discrepancy between our condition and theirs is not something this world can long sustain.”

Editor-in-Chief Edward Greenspon explains the challenge of covering the tsunami disaster during the Christmas break; it showed.

Jeff Simpson serves up his New Year’s quiz; I don’t recommend it if you have a hangover.

Speaking of hangovers, the editorial board says Francis Fukuyama was right 15 years ago about the spread of democracy and capitalism spelling the end of history; after 9/11, even Fukuyama stopped making the argument.

Letter writer W.P. Godfrey scores on same-sex marriage:

“It was kind of you to prepare a statement for our absent, dithering Prime Minister. The likelihood of him ever saying anything so definite is very small, as it isn't Paul Martin's style to be decisive.

However, is it really the case that, "Our conviction has grown as Canadians that there is only one right thing to do"? If so, then why is Mr. Martin afraid to let his cabinet vote on same-sex marriage? Are cabinet members, like NDP members, so benighted that they can't be trusted to do the "one right thing"?

In CanWest land, most papers are asleep today.

The Calgary Herald fronts the news that Canada has joined the US-led international disaster-relief coalition. The editorial board says Canadians are giving generously.

And I wish you and your families a happy, healthy and prosperous 2005.

Posted by Norman Spector on January 1, 2005 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

A prank -- or terrorism?

More than a half-dozen pilots across America have reported that, when landing their planes, they've been dazzled by people on the ground aiming lasers at their eyes. Some have had their vision damaged.

CNN reports that a man has been arrested -- but doesn't give details about that man's identity or motives. That could mean that CNN doesn't know -- or it could mean that, like on so many other occasions, CNN knows perfectly well, but has made the political decision not to reveal the perp's identity because it would, um, feed into certain stereotypes about young men trying to crash airplanes.

Posted by Ezra Levant on January 1, 2005 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Friday, December 31, 2004

Five Miles Of Hell

New Year's eve in Nagapattinum.

Dr Narsimhan gets back to his work, and I look up, where a helicoptor moves languidly across the sky. "That's the fifth one today," says a lady who is part of the doctor's team.

"They come and 'survey' the area,which is so pointless, because you cannot actually see the dead bodies from here amid this debris. It is just a show, to reassure themselves that they're on top of things. The army officers who come here, they refuse to even touch the bodies. They just hang around aimlessly."

[...]

And how are the NGOs handling the situation, I ask. "Oh, they are doing all the work,the government is doing nothing," she says. "But even they are competitive, trying hard to stake a claim to territory." I had noticed a similar tendency when I was on my way here, with many trucks adorned with banners proclaiming the name of the relief agency involved. The organisation I had chosen to travel with, Aid India, was an exception, though, working hard and sincerely to solve every problem that arose.

So why haven't the press written about this, I ask her. "The press," she snorts. "The journalists from the Hindu are all flying around with dignitaries. That is the kind of reporting they do."


Posted by Kate McMillan on December 31, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Mission of DART

With all of the talk about deploying DART or not I thought I would see what DART says about themselves and why they exist.  The following is (selectively) taken from their website: (emphasis added and I suggest you read the whole thing)

Operational criteria

The DART is a military organization designed to deploy rapidly anywhere in the world to crises ranging from natural disasters to complex humanitarian emergencies. The DART:

Mission capabilities

Comprising about 200 CF personnel ready to deploy quickly to conduct emergency relief operations for up to 40 days, the DART can bridge the gap until members of the international community arrive to provide long-term help. The DART is designed to deploy only to permissive environments — that is, locations where it will not encounter any organized resistance or threat.

Conclusion

Canada is an important provider of international humanitarian assistance and emergency relief. The creation of the DART enhanced the federal government's ability to meet both domestic and international requests for aid, and it demonstrates Canada's resolve to support disaster victims anywhere in the world.

Posted by Greg Staples on December 31, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack

The UN Springs To Action

The Diplomad has several good entries on the tsunami disaster relief, there's no point linking to a single one. Just read all the way down. This bit though, cuts to the chase - in response to criticism of the US by former British International Development Secretary Clare Short that "Only really the UN can do that job, It is the only body that has the moral authority.";

Do I really need to say anything more? "Only really the UN can do the job?" We have US C-130s flying in and out here dropping off heaps of supplies; US choppers arrive today; USAID is doing a knock-out job of marshalling and coordinating US and local resources to deliver real assistance to real people. The Aussies have planes and troops delivering stuff; even the Indians have goods on the way. The UN? Nowhere to be seen. OK, I'm not being fair. Last night they played host to a big "coordination" meeting of donors to announce that the UNDP has another large "assessment and coordination team" team arriving. Our USAID guys, who've been working 18-20 hrs/ day, came back furious from this meeting saying everybody would be dead if the delivery of aid waited for the UN to set up shop and begin "coordinating." The UN types are upset with the US, Ms. Short, dear, not because we're undermining them but because we're showing them up as totally inept.

Which reminds me - any word yet from our Canadian 12-member "reconnaissance team" ?

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 31, 2004 in International Affairs | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

The papers today again lead with the tsunamis. Indonesia —where the death toll could rise to 100,000—receives most of the attention.

Some papers emphasize the devastation, others the tales of survivors. Most go high with the local angle.

Several reports today focus on international aid and competition over which country is the most generous, or least stingy of them all.

At home, the Martin government is still scrambling to get on top of the situation. The Prime Minister, presumably red in the face, will arrive back in Ottawa from Morocco tomorrow.

Some of our compatriots in the nation’s capital have already moved on. NDP'ers want to be appointed to the Senate. The Governor-General is visiting our troops in Afghanistan.

In the UK, Tony Blair is refusing to convene the G-8. The Honours List has been published and the Tories have launched a pre-emptive strike.

Freedom of Information legislation comes into force tomorrow, and the Guardian knows the poop it’s after. The Financial Times is reporting some scary stuff about Prozac.

In France, parents will be able to choose their children’s’ family names as of tomorrow. What’s next in this crazy world?

There’s new hope for peace in Senegal, and Le Monde interviews a couple of gents who were released from Cuban prisons .

In the US, the Los Angeles Times fronts damaging information about a man who could be the next Chief Justice. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board endorses that man today. Yikes.

Another editorialist says the bloom is off terrorism, a third does the math and concludes that CEOs in the US are younger, more female and less Ivy League.

Columnist Daniel Henninger looks back at 2004. On the front page, the Journal reports on new US torture rules.

Below the fold, the New York Times fronts problems with social security in the US , and violent class-conflict in China

Inside, Canada ’s suspected mad cow is reported. The Montréal band Stars’ “Set Yourself on Fire” gets a rave review.

We learn that Artie Shaw passed away at the age of 94. You can listen to some of his tracks here, and here’s the L. A. Times report.

The Washington Post serves up the third and final instalment on terrorists and WMD—today, of the chemical variety. Our second suspected mad cow is stuffed.

The New York Times’ editorial board serves up its New Year’s resolutions.

The Washington Post’s editorial board poops on Pakistan ’s Pervez Musharraf and on George Bush, too.

US AID Administrator Robert Natsios weighs in on aid to the disaster areas. David Ignatius serves up headlines you’re guaranteed not to read in 2005.

The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board looks back at science in 2004, says Karl Rove was the man of the year and accuses Canada’s Intrawest of being at the peak of fakery.

Jonathan Chait pans the Administration for cuts in science funding.

The Toronto Star editorial board accords lawyer Martha McCarthy the laurel of the year for her work on same-sex marriage. Top darts go to the NHL disputants.

The paper fronts Kofi Annan admitting that relief efforts are falling short, Tamils fighting for their share and a local MP who was on the immigration hot seat last night.

Kelly Gillespie reports from Thailand. From Ottawa, Jim Travers lets the PM off the hook but otherwise writes the truth about the government’s pitiful performance this week.

And, if you read Haroon Sidiqqui, you’ll understand why much of Canada’s foreign policy is essentially domestic politics.

Speaking of the influence of Canada’s largest circulation daily, as regular readers of this press review will know, for some months I’ve been challenging the Star to produce a list of the 45 countries in which Gwynne Dyer’s articles are published.

Yesterday, it effectively conceded the point, though—like most Star readers--you probably missed it.

Normally, the Star tag line on his columns reads: “Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.”

Yesterday, the line was revised to indicate that his “articles are published in 45 papers worldwide.”

Since the Star has been misleading readers since 1999, you’d think they would have corrected the mistake.

I waited a day to see if they were late as they sometimes are, but they’ve issued neither a correction nor an apology to readers.

In fairness, the Star’s editors might not be responsible for the “burnished” qualifications they’ve published over the years.

A web search turns up several sites that contain “exaggerated” claims of the fecundity of Dyer’s punditry, including this Department of Foreign Affairs biography, to which visitors to his “only official website” are referred.

Elsewhere today, the Globe and Mail fronts the Canadian aid effort, a report from its stringer in Banda Aceh and Geoff York in Thailand.

The Globe also fronts some PR for the government on why DART was not dispatched. Inside, you’ll find a puff piece on how and why Bill Graham stepped up to the mike.

From the UN, Shawn McCarthy reports on US aid. Roy MacGregor is still in Saskatchewan. And the Globe wins the award for today’s most sophisticated correction.

The editorial board sees signs of hope for Mideast peace. Closer to home, it suggests Canada should strive to become the world’s most literate nation:

“A cultural change is needed to make it happen. Canadians need to say goodbye to reading mediocrity. Goodbye to third place on international reading tests, the ranking that this country's 15-year-olds achieved on the recently released 2003 OECD test. (Four other countries were roughly tied with Canada in third.) If third is a dismal result in ice hockey, it should be a dismal result in reading, too….By the thousands, children are playing hockey 10, 15, even 20 hours a week, including the interminable drives to and from the rink. When was the last time a child spent 20, 15 or even 10 hours in one week with books?”

The National Post editorial board accuses the government of dodging Parliament, and stuffs today’s top story, another Bob Fife doozie.

The paper fronts Canadians’ contributions outstripping the government’s, along with Robert Fulford’s long review of 2004, which is worth the price of the paper. Here’s a sample:

“Martin spent so much time abroad that his appearances in Ottawa began to feel like state visits….He was working within a Canadian cultural tradition founded by Lord Ronald in Stephen Leacock's Gertrude the Governess, the man who flung himself upon his horse and rode madly off in all directions.

Stephen Harper proved one of the year's great surprises. In the election campaign many voters expressed the fear that he would be captured by the hard right; little did they know that he was on the way to being bent out of shape by the soggy middle….

In the United States…Republicans made it clear they considered the Democrats loose-living, divorce-prone liberals who couldn't be trusted with America's soul; Democrats pictured Republicans as war-lovers who were fighting in Iraq either on a whim or because they hoped to make money. The Republicans had the advantage of enthusiasm; they apparently loved their candidate, whereas Democrats tolerated theirs, in the mistaken belief that he could defeat George W. Bush, the object of virulent liberal hatred…

When Yasser Arafat died in Paris in November, politicians across the West took this news as a welcome occasion for a hypocritical display of mock sorrow. But among the Palestinians, who had been victimized for decades by Arafat's murderous irresponsibility, his death opened fresh possibilities for peace and maybe economic progress as well….

[Premier Danny] Williams, a visionary, plans to lead a province that will be simultaneously both a have and a have-not, a new phenomenon in Canadian history.”

Inside, Fulford dishes up another fine piece—this one on columnist Bill Safire, who’s retiring. Unfortunately, Sheila Copps is not:

“The year began with what could best be described as my very public mid-life crisis. …

It is akin to a life-altering loss: You experience the same stages of grief felt in a death or divorce.

First, denial. I could not believe this was happening. How could I be forced out of a seat in Parliament to which I had devoted more than two decades of my life?

That emotion was quickly replaced by anger. The anger grew, but it also allowed my creative juices to flow. I closeted myself in a room and applied the best tourniquet to a bleeding heart -- the written word.,,,

I drank from a full cup in politics and I wanted more. But when it was not to be, I started to experience another side of the life I had put on hold. For the first time, I could plan dinner parties and family gatherings knowing they would not be cancelled. I no longer spent almost every weekend at work. Almost 35 years after we hung up our shoes, I joined old basketball chums in a reunion. And I rediscovered a passion for sailing with my husband.

All this is to say that as we prepare for Auld Lang Syne tonight, there will be few tears shed on my part for what was, and much anticipation for what will be.”

Elsewhere in CanWest land, the Vancouver Sun fronts news that the mother of the boy mauled by dogs earlier this week is a convicted drug dealer.

Yours truly weighs in with some federal and provincial predictions for 2005.

The Calgary Herald fronts the suspected mad cow, which turns out to be an Alberta bovine.

The editorial board dishes up its views, as do the tall foreheads in Edmonton. As Yogi used to say, can't anyone back there play this game?

The Ottawa Citizen fronts Canada forgiving debts, safe cigarettes and unsafe birth-control pills, a story that’s stuffed in Montréal. The Gaz editorial board comments on new tax breaks for filmmakers.

Inside the Citizen, the editorial board plumps for fair cab fares. Susan Riley weighs in on Stephen Harper:

“If there was an annual award for tactical daring, Stephen Harper would be the winner in 2004. The opposition leader engineered a brazen, daylight robbery of the Conservative brand, stealing the venerable party of John A. Macdonald from under the noses of confused and dispirited Progressive Conservatives.

At the same time, he buried the still-young Reform Party so completely and unsentimentally that there has never been a proper wake -- much less the wailing and whining you would have expected from so independent-minded a bunch.

Now Harper is busy crafting an agenda for his new Conservative Party that will be close enough to the Liberal platform -- centrist, incremental and familiar -- to avoid exciting concern in central Canada, but will, ideally, appear fresher, younger and more honest. In keeping with Liberal tradition, it will be light on detail and heavy on talk about "values."…

For all his shrewdness and intelligence, Harper still inspires mistrust. His conversion to mainstream values, for instance, is hard to credit given the depth and conviction with which he has written and spoken in defence of right-wing economic ideas. And long-time observers say he has become more, not less, socially conservative in recent years.

But he certainly knows how to play the political game. We'll soon see whether Canadians are willing to play along.”

In the Toronto Sun, Peter Worthington says the US gets a bad rap on foreign aid; he needs an arithmetic refresher in percentages--say, of GDP. Linda Williamson awards this year’s Pammys.

Bob MacDonald pans Paul Martin disastrous disaster performance, and Michael Harris does the honours to the PM from Ottawa.

TOP STORY

Quit sniping at Bush, Liberal MPs told

The National Post’s Robert Fife reports:

Posted by Norman Spector on December 31, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (97) | TrackBack

Gwynne Dyer

From the next edition of NORMAN'S SPECTATOR.

Speaking of the Star, as regular readers of this press review will know, for some months I’ve been challenging the paper to produce a list of the 45 countries in which Gwynne Dyer’s articles are published.

Yesterday, it effectively conceded the point, though—like most Star readers--you probably missed it.

Normally, the Star tag line on his columns reads:

“Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.”

Yesterday, the line was revised to indicate that his “articles are published in 45 papers worldwide.”

Since the Star has been misleading its readers since 1999, you’d think they would have corrected the mistake. I waited a day to see if they were late, but they’ve issued neither a correction nor an apology to readers.

In fairness, the Star’s editors might not be responsible for the “burnished” qualifications they’ve published over the years.

A web search turns up several sites that contain “exaggerated” claims of the fecundity of Dyer’s punditry, including this Department of Foreign Affairs biography, to which visitors to his “only official website” are referred.


Posted by Norman Spector on December 31, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, December 30, 2004

Strong and Free

If you have not read LCol (R) Hawn's letter to the PM on his blog Strong and Free check it out (Hat-Tips to Babbling Brooks and Let it Bleed)

...The excuse that deploying DART would cost money that could be better utilized by on-site national agencies is only partly true. The cost figures quoted, when government is trying to justify inaction, include things like salaries and other fixed costs that will be paid whether DART deploys or not. The real reason that we are in our now-customary role of dithering is much more fundamental. We simply can't get there from here, because that capability has been allowed to wither, and it would be another international embarrassment to show how weak we have really become.

On a positive note it looks like our governments (Federal and Provincial) are finally giving more significant amounts of money to aid in relief.

PoliticalStaples

Posted by Greg Staples on December 30, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Truth And Its Consequences

Via James Joyner this preview of Donald Sensing's upcoming book, tentatively titled Truth and Its Consequences.

This war is in fact a religious war all around, even though we of the West generally shun the idea. Unquestionably, though, our Islamist enemies know it, as do hundreds of millions of other Muslims who have not taken up arms against us. Even Muslim voices who counsel peace to their brethren understand what the real religion of Western people is, often more than we.

In the last several hundred years the West evolved a distinctive answer of what is truth and what is its authority. In contrast, Islam's progress in that inquiry mostly stopped just as the West was shifting out of first gear. Until the last half-century, the divergence between the West's and Islam's theology and philosophy of truth was not a basis for contention. After World War II the divergence took on a character that unfortunately was much more adversarial than cooperative, and finally more violent than peaceful.

This history, later coupled with cheap technology, worldwide communications and increasing globalization of economies and politics, butted headlong into Islamic societies that were ruthlessly patriarchal, theocratic, tribal and anti-democratic, all antithetical to what the West had become. After a four-hundred year hiatus, armed conflict between the West and a powerful strain of Islam broke out again.

This book is an historical, philosophical and religious exploration of how America and the West came into potentially catastrophic conflict with a prominent strain of Islam. For that topic, everyone, regardless of religion, creed or nationality is intensely interested in questions about truth and its authority. Like Pilate, both we and our present enemies realize that some answers are very threatening and that not all answers can be reconciled with one another. Unless we improve our understanding of the deep roots of the conflict and what is really at stake, we can't effectively discern what to do next.


Donald Sensing is a retired military officer and Methodist minister. Read more...

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 30, 2004 in Religion | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Infidels, Keep Right

And don't try to fool me with that Aspirin tablet religion, either.

hat tip - PUBLIUS

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 30, 2004 in Religion | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

Newspapers in the UK and France lead with international aid to areas hit by the tsunami.

The Financial Times of London reports on delays in Indonesia ’s Aceh province, along with doubts about Rosneft’s link with Gazprom.

The Washington Post also reports that aid distribution is painfully slow.

Below the fold, the Post fronts the second in its series on WMD and terrorism, and a wrap-up on spending in the presidential election.

The New York Times puts George Bush front and centre, off leads the Pentagon offering up big budget cuts and stuffs Canadian cattle.

The editorial board focuses on the face of grief, and says the US is indeed stingy.

Former Secretary of State Warren Christopher weighs in on Mideast peace. Frank Rich says while soldiers are dying, Washington is partying.

The Washington Post’s editorial board looks at Turkey in the EU. David Broder serves up his annual catalogue of goofs.

Jim Hoagland looks ahead to 2005. George Will looks back at welfare reform.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the death toll could reach 80,000 in Indonesia alone. Below the fold, the paper carries a report on Iraqis returning to Fallujah.

The editorial board is onto the need for clean water. Max Boot says the US must apply the lessons of Ukraine elsewhere. Bruce Babbitt says the Administration is killing wild salmon.

The Wall Street Journal reports that China may have a surplus, not a shortage of steel. The editorial board says the US economy is still the strongest in the world.

Peggy Noonan says the earthquake/tsunamis is the biggest story of 2004. Edward Jay Epstein tells the story of Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen from the KGB’s point of view.

In France, the delinquency rate is down. Questions are being asked about the leading candidate to succeed Jacques Chirac—as reported yesterday, a recent visitor chez Paul Desmarais.

In the UK, women are being kept out of the top jobs, and credit cards have officially supplanted cash.

FOI legislation is about to take effect; Sir Humphrey would not be amused. And he’s not among the contenders for the True Brit award.

At home, the Prime Minister and key ministers are still away, but not for much longer. And wait until he sees what Judge Gomery has waiting for him--today's top story.

With the disaster and relief efforts topping the news, the Toronto Star fronts Susan Delacourt ’s report that Martin and his minions are “speeding” home.”

The National Post and the Official Opposition are much less charitable; the Globe and Mail stuffs the criticism and gives the PM a pass.

Canadian cattlepersons are celebrating yesterday’s news, perhaps prematurely; the CBC reports today that another suspected mad cow has been found.

Aside from panicking politicians, the Star fronts Martin Regg-Cohn in Sri Lanka and Kerry Gillespie in Thailand.

Inside, Robert Benzie chases last week’s Ottawa Citizen story about Dalton McGuinty’s travel plans. Gwynne Dyer is onto world government and the end of war.

Yesterday, the Star’s editorial board intoned that Paul Martin must learn to focus in 2005, which is just about when he’ll arrive back in Canada.

Today, they urge his government to support the winner in Ukraine, which seems rather obvious.

The Globe and Mail fronts Geoff York in Thailand, Canadian aid, new rules for immigrants from the devastated areas and a Vancouver family searching for missing relatives.

Inside, Roy MacGregor reports on education bridging Saskatchewan’s two solitudes.

The editorial board serves up a speech for Paul Martin on same-sex marriage; they appear to agree with yours truly (in today’s Le Devoir and in Monday’s Globe) that it’s a political—not a legal--decision:

“We could, using the notwithstanding clause of the Charter, say no. We could say to the courts: We simply do not believe you have got this right. You are out of step with what Canadians think and feel and believe.

But that wouldn't be true. Our conviction has grown as Canadians that there is only one right thing to do. That it is time to make the leap, difficult as it may be. That we should reach out to those who have been excluded during most of recorded history. That we understand the fortress of marriage will be stronger when we open its gates to those who profess so clearly and eloquently their wish to be part of it.”

Another editorialist weighs in on Canada ’s disaster relief:

“Prime Minister Paul Martin has been criticized undeservedly for not rushing back from his Morocco vacation to take charge of Canada 's response. He has shown that he is keeping well abreast of developments. The same cannot be said for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew and International Development Minister Aileen Carroll, the two ministers responsible for co-ordinating Canada 's efforts in such humanitarian crises. Both of them were absent from their posts on holiday until they had their vacations cut short yesterday by Mr. Martin. They should have returned much sooner. Politicians need to be seen and heard often at times like these, particularly when so many Canadians have relatives or friends caught up in the catastrophe.

What the politicians need to make clear is that Ottawa is doing its part in the massive relief effort, both in terms of dollars and other resources. The government must also do its part to ensure that all the assistance ends up where it is most needed, that precious capital is not wasted and that there is no needless duplication of effort.

The rest is up to communities and individuals across the country, which have responded with customary generosity, digging deep into their own funds in this season of giving and good will.”

In commentary, Lawrence Martin opines on natural disasters:

“The Liberals were obviously stung by the criticism in the first two days that they were not doing enough in response to the tragedy. With everyone, including the Prime Minister, on holiday, they were caught off guard. The $4-million they were pledging was chicken feed given the enormity of the calamity — and given the fact that the government is sitting on a big surplus and can afford much more. That first response would have been a confirmation of what the critics have been saying all along about lamentable foreign-aid efforts.

The Third World is where Ottawa can make a difference. Calamities like this one serve to draw attention to the egregious disparities between the First World and the one that is deprived. While the opportunity is there, while the world is focused, advantage has to be taken.

If there were any justice, it would be the wealthiest countries that bore the brunt of nature's tragedies. Instead, it is always the other way around.”

In the Montréal Gazette, L. Ian MacDonald looks at Stephen Harper’s challenge in 2005:

“the first thing Harper has to do in the new year is control the agenda for his party's policy convention in March here in Montreal. And it comes back to the first lesson out of the campaign. If the headline out of the convention is a positive one of a centre-right party positioned as a government in waiting, the Conservatives will move to the next level. If the story line is of a party captured by the radical right, Harper will be doomed to a career-ending second defeat in the next election.

The next year will tell us a lot about Harper's capacity for growth, and his prospects for for becoming prime minister.”

In National Post commentary, Don Martin reviews 2004. John Weissenberger and George Koch weigh in on Alberta ’s liquor privatization:

“In the good old days before September, 1993, Calgary had 24 outlets to serve a population of more than 700,000…. Today Calgary has more than 225 liquor, wine or beer stores. Everything from strip mall vendors with walk-in beer coolers to swish oenophile boutiques with names like "Metrovino." Critics bemoan the poor selection in neighbourhood outlets, as if anyone expects a Mac's or 7-11 convenience store to offer the same line-up as a Safeway or A&P.”

Adam Radwanski says it’s been a disappointing year for three federal leaders:

“Messrs. Martin, Harper and Layton are all relatively novice leaders, which leaves open the possibility that what we saw in 2004 were just growing pains. For their sake, you have to hope so: If the next year is anything like the last one, each one may be looking for a new line of work sooner than he'd like.

If nothing else, at least they won't be entering 2005 with artificially high expectations.”

Posted by Norman Spector on December 30, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Wednesday, December 29, 2004

"Even If Required"

Reuters on the news conference by Bill Graham that already has our local radio news people crowing that Canada has pledged "more than the US" to tsunami relief:

Defence Minister Bill Graham, explaining why the ministers had not come home more quickly, told a news conference: "The scope of the tragedy, the scope of the damage that was done, took some time for us to absorb."

Not to anyone who knows how to spell "Drudge Report", Bill. Try it, sometime.
The government has faced repeated questions as to why it was not sending its Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), a 200- member military unit created precisely for this kind of emergency. Graham said it would cost C$15 million to C$20 million just to get it there and said it would not be able to arrive before next week even if required. He said the reconnaissance team leaving on Thursday for the region would determine if parts or all of the rapid response team were needed.

Graham: "This is an issue we look at in terms of whether it's appropriate, whether countries need it and whether or not it's worth moving it."

The Diplomad is is at the scene. Mercifully, Canada stayed outside his line of fire today. He begins by quoting a UN statement;

As the United Nations system moves into high gear to identify the immediate needs of the countries devastated by the South Asian tsunami that has reportedly claimed nearly 70,000 lives and affected millions more, initial actions have been tailored to help each of the worst-hit nations.

The UN site then goes on to list all the "donations" that the World Food Program and other UN agencies are making to alleviate the suffering.

OK. We'll make this short.

Let's start with the last citation, the one from the UN. I can tell you, dear readers, that I am temporarily working in one of the countries that got slammed hard by the tsunami and while the UN effort might be in high gear, it must have its parking brake on. No sign of that effort here! Lots of bureaucrats flying in and out, but that's about it.

And now to that Egeland character and the UN official site's claims. Notice to the UN: The USA is BY FAR the biggest donor to the UN system. We pay for about 25% of the whole operation, BUT when you look at operations like WFP or UNHCR, we cough up about 40%. That wheat and rice that the WFP is bragging about? It is almost all from the USA. Notice to Mr. Egeland: if taxpayers want to give more they can do so without having the government reach into their wallets. Ever hear of charities? The American people are BY FAR the biggest donors to private charities -- many of which are doing very fine work here in alleviating the suffering. Please note, they are actually on the ground, delivering goods and services, not flying about on first class tickets and holding press conferences in New York.

Now to that weird Post newspaper. Whom have you heard saying Bush is insensitive to the plight of the victims of this natural disaster? I haven't heard that here in ground zero. I doubt you've heard it anywhere but in the MSM.

Well, whaddaya know? The German Chancellor has cut short his vacation! Now that's gotta hurt a EUroweenie, huh? Giving up a day or two of the four or five or six months annual vacation EUrocrats get --boy that feeds and shelters a lot of people out here! They really appreciate it, Mr Chancellor! And those $4 million the ENTIRE EU has pledged, yeah, that'll do it! I'm sure it will be a big help when some of it gets here in about six months.

One more note about the USA. The amounts listed in the newspapers as donated by the USA greatly underestimate the true size of the donation we make. We are moving huge numbers of aircraft, ships, and personnel to help out. We have carriers and even a MEU on the move. And guess what? We don't charge the UN for that, and we don't include those enormous costs in any "pledging conferences." The only countries I see delivering goods and services where I am are the Aussies (who are terrific!) and us. The EU is only to be seen in press releases.

These lib-left people and their posturing make me sick . . . real folks are dying and the comfortable chattering lefties want little lip-biting gestures. I'll take a C-130 any day.

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 29, 2004 in International Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Primer on liberty

Our columnist, Pierre Lemieux, sent me this flash refresher on libertarianism.

Posted by Ezra Levant on December 29, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of: NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

With the death toll rising and disease looming, papers around the world lead with the Asian tsunamis. A report from Indonesia indicates the eventual toll could reach 100,000 deaths.

A senior UN official has criticized “stingy” wealthy countries and wealthy governments are scrambling.

The UN is said to be preparing the “largest-ever” disaster relief appeal. President Bush’s vacation is noted in a Washington Post front-page story.

At home, too, the adequacy of relief efforts is being questioned, though not Prime Minister Martin’s absence.

Across the country, local survivors figure prominently in the coverage (here, here and here), as do new Canadians who lost relatives and the missing.

However, life goes on: Le Monde fronts the Egyptian fashion industry and editorializes on new international textile rules. The Wall Street Journal fronts an obesity boom, thanks to Arabs' preference for zaftig women.

The Los Angeles Times’ Column One follows a Lebanese jihadi to Iraq and back. The Viktor who won the Ukrainian election is reaching out to Russia.

In the UK, senior public servants are criticizing Tony Blair—no, he's not a ditherer, it's just that he spends too much time on the sofa. In-fighting within his Labour Party is also a worry.

Overseas investors are being warned away for tax reasons. Sikh violence that closed down a stage play continues to receive attention.

In France, 2004 was the year of Sarko, the man many believe will be the next President and who happens to be in Canada visiting you know whom.

The freelancers who nearly screwed up the release of the two French hostages in Iraq are being investigated.

In the US, The New York Times fronts below the fold, the latest shake-up at the CIA and, as does The Washington Post, the death of Susan Sontag.

(Here’s the Guardian’s obit, and here’s an appreciation in Le Devoir.)

The Post also fronts nuclear proliferation, and stuffs some scary stuff on the dirty bomb threat.

The New York Times’ editorial board weighs in on immigration reform.

Bill Safire serves up his 2005 predictions. Simon Winchester connects the dots of seismic events.

The Washington Post’s editorial board comments on international relief efforts. Robert J. Samuelson is onto the next economy.

In The Wall Street Journal, Claudia Rosett says forget about reform, the UN needs regime change. Nat Hentoff looks at Bob Dylan.

The Journal’s editorial board looks at another UN scandal—sex-for-food:

“Two years after the charges first surfaced, Kofi Annan has finally admitted that U.N. peacekeeping troops sexually abused war refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo. "I am really shocked by these accusations," the United Nations Secretary-General told reporters last week.

He shouldn't be. Allegations of sex crimes committed by U.N. staff and troops date back at least a decade and span operations on three continents, in places like Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cambodia. But rather than showing the kind of "zero tolerance" toward sexual crimes that Mr. Annan now promises, the U.N. has treated such instances with cavalier nonchalance. In Congo, some 150 cases are under investigation.”

A Globe and Mail reporter has arrived in Thailand, and the paper also fronts a round-up of wire service copy on the disaster.

Inside, Roy MacGregor is still in Saskatchewan, where aboriginals are staying and non-aboriginals aren’t. From Kyiv, Mark MacKinnon reports that Belarus is next.

Inside, too, the Globe chases a National Post story on three illegal immigrants who escaped from a detention centre and the grounding of Canada’s disaster relief team,

Globe reporters also catch up today with yesterday’s New York Times story on blogs and the Asian disaster, and the dog attack in BC that was front-page news in the Vancouver Sun.

The editorial board is enthusiastic about the Ukraine election, and says Canada needs a single securities regulator--presumably a few blocks away from its offices.

In commentary, General Lewis Mackenzie makes the case for missile defence; in the circumstances, he should have written his piece in Morocco or, failing that, in La Presse.

Marcus Gee weighs in on foreign aid:

“It has been 34 years since the United Nations urged its wealthiest members to devote the equivalent of 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product to foreign aid every year. Except for a small handful of generous countries ( Denmark , Norway , Sweden , the Netherlands and Luxembourg ), none has come close. In fact, many have gone backward. Canada , for one, spends 0.28 per cent of GDP, way down from its peak of 0.53 per cent in 1975-76. As Mr. Egeland had the temerity to note, “There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy.”

That is what makes the proportionate drop in aid so deplorable. It has happened against a background of ever-increasing wealth in the developed world. Overall, the world's rich donor countries are two and a half times more wealthy than they were in 1960. Yet their average aid donation per capita has barely budged, rising from $61 to $67 in inflation-adjusted terms.”

Trudeau-acolyte Martin Goldfarb poops on the current Prime Minister:

“After one year, Paul Martin's government seems to be floundering. It lacks clear direction. It has moved on health care with an approach akin to asymmetrical federalism — the same approach Canadians turned down with Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accord. The Liberal Party has not endorsed such an approach. The government's strategy on health care is just one example of how it has moved forward without the consent of its grass roots. The question is: Who speaks for the Liberal Party?”

Konrad Yakabuski reports on an important visitor who's visit you’ve haven’t read much about elsewhere:

“Mr. Sarkozy's stay at Mr. Desmarais' massive Sagard estate — so big it's considered a pillar of the local economy — has the power elite in Montreal and Paris alike evergreen with envy. But it only confirms a universal truth: Whether your goal is 24 Sussex Dr. or the Élysée, you need to know Paul Desmarais.

This isn't news to Canadians. Prime Minister Paul Martin used to work for him. Mr. Desmarais and Jean Chrétien have grandkids in common. Brian Mulroney entered Mr. Desmarais' inner circle in the 1960s and remains a close friend.”

The Toronto Star fronts its reporter in Sri Lanka, and the paper has another in Thailand who reports on the fate of Canadian vacationers.

The paper puts a positive spin on our disaster relief team's efforts, or lack thereof. Leaders of Greater Toronto's East Indian community are unhappy with Canada ’s aid effort.

The editorial board says more disaster aid is required, and that Paul Martin needs to focus—presumably, after he returns from vacation.

The National Post fronts the tsunami and Chinese espionage in Canada .

In commentary, Peter Foster is onto Adam Smith. Laval economist Gérard Bélanger asks why Québec receives equalization:

“When used to measure poverty, the low revenue cut-offs indicate that in 1996, the poverty rate was 5.1 percentage points higher in Quebec than in Ontario ; when the market basket measure is used, however, the poverty rate is 1.7 percentage points higher in Ontario than in Quebec . For the year 2000, both measures indicate the rate of poverty is higher in Quebec than it is in Ontario : the low income cut-offs measure yields a difference of 4.6 percentage points, while the market basket measure shows a difference of 0.9 percentage point. Looked at this way, Quebec 's rate of low-income households is quite similar to that in Ontario.”

Robert Fulford remembers Susan Sontag:

“In 1982, she infuriated many fellow intellectuals with an abrupt about-face. After General Wojciech Jaruzelski imposed martial law in Poland in December, 1981, Sontag suddenly turned violently against communism. At a rally in New York , she announced: "Communism is fascism -- successful fascism, if you will." She denounced American intellectuals for their genial tolerance of Soviet crimes and went so far as to say that in the previous three decades the Reader's Digest had published a more honest account of world affairs than The Nation, one of the leading American liberal magazines.

Having stepped out of line, she was excoriated by her traditional allies, who claimed her angry critique was simple-minded, a charge otherwise never made against her. A year or so later she told me she was planning a book on this incident, but the book never appeared. On the subject of totalitarianism that is ignored by liberals, Sontag fell silent.

The anger of her friends had put her in her place. She had learned that some opinions are too intolerable to be expressed, even by one of the great intellectual stars of her time.”

Posted by Norman Spector on December 29, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

Priorities

Israel, in a smaller version of the U.S., sends out disaster relief teams even to countries that are hostile to it. Except, that is, when those hostile countries are so hostile they'd rather have their own people die than to accept help from Jews.

Posted by Ezra Levant on December 28, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Susan Sontag - RIP

Laurence Simon has a devastatingly cruel - and apt - obituary for an outspoken apologist of terrorism.

The breast cancer cells that killed Susan Sontag were not cowards or an "evil" disease attacking an individual human being. No, they were the bravest of cells, attacking Susan from within at high risk to their own existence, uprising and resisting the constant bombardment from the so-called "brave" medical practicioners bathing her in radiation and chemotherapy. These so-called curatives were nothing more than genocidal technological campaigns waged against the livelihood of these innocent cancer cells, and these treatments slaughtered these cancer cells that had just as much a right to live and go about their business as any other of the cells in Susan's body.

Ouch.

(hat tip - OTB)

update - Michelle Malkin has more. It would serve some our outraged lefty friends to learn a little more about Susan "the white race is the cancer of human history" Sontag. The worst that can be said about Laurence Simon's sarcasm is that "she got as good as she gave".

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 28, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (26) | TrackBack

SUV's Kill Thousands In SE Asia

It took them two days, but Greenpeace has found a way to tie the tsunami in Southeast Asia to global warming. You see, it's all about the mangrove swamps!

A creeping rise in sea levels tied to global warming, pollution and damage to coral reefs may make coastlines even more vulnerable to disasters like tsunamis or storms in future, experts said Monday.

Few coastal ecosystems are robust enough to withstand freak waves like the ones that slammed into Asian nations from Sri Lanka to Thailand Sunday, killing more than 22,000 people, after a subsea earthquake off Indonesia.

But global warming, poorly planned coastal development and other threats over which humans have some control are weakening natural defenses ranging from mangrove swamps to coral reefs that help keep the oceans at bay.


I notice that "human overpopulation" is seldom cited as a problem in the wake of such events. Even Greenpeace knows when an argument becomes an oxymoron.


Posted by Kate McMillan on December 28, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack

"What Is Your Final Wish?"

Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and a US Marine were hiking through the Iraqi desert one day...

Via Instapundit.

Posted by Kate McMillan on December 28, 2004 in Media | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of: NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

In Ukraine, the loser is not going gently without a fight, but today’s papers in the US, the UK and France again lead with the devastating tsunamis in Asia.

The Indonesian province of Aceh, where an entire town was wiped out, may have been the hardest hit.

Below the fold in the New York Times, life goes on in the US. Stuffed inside, you’ll find an article on refugee-claimants at the Canadian border. (Here it is in the Globe.)

In the UK, too, life goes on, with a record turnout at the Boxing Day fox-hunt. Tourists are returning home with tales of the tsunami.

Corporate governance in on the table as a result of a financial scam. Tony Blair has been questioned about his vacation in France chez a tobacco mogul.

Across the channel, 17 people died in an apartment-building explosion. There’ve been new developments in the rape trial of a pop star. The French, too, are celebrating the Orange Revolution.

In Iraq, the largest Sunni party announced it is boycotting the election, a story that runs below the fold in the Washington Post.

The Los Angeles Times fronts Osama bin Laden’s latest taped message, which called for a boycott and might have produced one.

The New York Times’ editorial board weighs in on the Ukraine election results, and on the extension of the Pacific’s tsunami-early warning system.

Sitting atop a major fault (I know the feeling), the Los Angeles Times’ editorial board is onto the earthquake and the tsunami, in addition to the Ukraine election. Robert Scheer looks at Guantanamo.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board says prosperity is the best defense against a tsunami. Brendan Miniter looks ahead to Bush’s second term.

At home, Canadian papers also lead with the tsunami, with special emphasis on the local angle.

Our disaster-relief team could not get off the ground, but Canadian commandos are on a pricey shopping-spree.

The Toronto Star has boots on the ground both in Ukraine and Sri Lanka, and also fronts the local angle to the tsunamis and stuffs another.

Susan Delacourt interviewed the departing US ambassador. Tom Walkom serves up a fine piece on shari’a tribunals.

The Globe and Mail fronts a re-write on the tsunami, Canadians dead and missing and Ukraine.

Mark MacKinnon reports from Eastern Ukraine. Roy MacGregor is still in Saskatoon and, incredibly enough, he’s found someone who moved there from California.

On second thought, why not? As the highway sign says, New York is big, but this is Biggar. And did you know, by the way, that Manhattan is in Ontario?

Inside the Globe, as you might expect, the letters page is filled with missives about this column about same-sex marriage published yesterday; in my humble estimation, the author is un-bloodied and still standing but, for the price of the paper, you can judge.

Runner-up on the letters page is negative reaction to William Thorsell’s campaign to have Brian Mulroney take over the UN; I guess the former Globe editor does not read the competition, or even the Globe’s editorials any more.

In commentary today, Ken Frankel and David Wippman weigh in on Paul Martin’s “responsibility to protect”:

“If by invoking the “responsibility to protect,” he means only that Canada should not intervene without UN sanction, then the Maple Leaf now affixed to the notion of a “responsibility to protect” may be just a fig leaf for inaction. But if he believes that the “responsibility to protect” should permit coalitions of the willing to intervene militarily even without a UN imprimatur, then he should tell us when and how Canada would join such coalitions, and with what consequences for the UN's traditional legal order.

The only certainty in Mr. Martin's pledge is that it will ring hollow unless he reinvests in Canada 's military capability. Without that, the world will know that Canada cannot assume its own share of the responsibility to protect that it is urging on others.”

Former Winnipeg mayor Glen Murray weighs in on same-sex marriage, which he’s elevated to a fundamental right; he must be reading a different Charter than the one I have in my office:

“I support the right of faith communities to choose not to marry people of the same sex (although I disagree with it). But our right to marry in a church or other faith community that believes in marrying gays is not only a “legitimate right,” it's a fundamental one. In Winnipeg and Toronto , the rainbow flags and other gay-positive statements outside places of worship inspire me. Gays and lesbians are being welcomed back into the faiths they grew up in. We're part of a growing number of Canadians rediscovering spiritual life. If Mr. Harper wants to “vigorously” protect religious freedom, will the Conservatives fight to protect those faith communities that are willing to marry gay and lesbian couples? Surely they also have rights.”

Former Ontario premier Bob Rae makes a (weak) case for subsidizing Bombardier; if the rationale is "everyone's doing it," why wouldn't we also drive down our wage rates to the levels in China?:

“The companies with which Bombardier competes worldwide are strongly supported by governments. The United States does it through its massive defence industry, by export supports, by local and state subsidies. The Europeans do the same, with a healthy overlay of state and Europe-wide measures on science and technology. So do Brazil, China, Russia, India.

The issue for Canadian governments is not a matter of philosophy. It is an intensely practical one — is this a game we want to play? If we do not, we have to accept the consequences. If we do, it's of course important to ensure that the public interest is protected. But the debate has centred on resentment toward Quebec or the naive assumption that if governments were to decide on a blanket no-support rule, the result would be a lean, competitive Canadian aerospace industry successfully weaned off an unhealthy reliance on the state. The latter theory is a fantasy. Without consistent government support we won't have an industry to speak of at all.”

The editorial board weighs in on the disaster, and inveighs against Cuba , where it ends up throwing a wet noodle:

“Canadians looking for a winter break should not necessarily avoid the island, as Americans are told to do. The U.S. embargo on trade, tourism and investment has been a failure. But Canadian visitors should at least be aware of the country's plight under Mr. Castro and go with their eyes open.”

The National Post and other CanWest papers front the tsunami. The Ottawa Citizen adds tightened security keeping fraudsters out of Canada, whom the Post stuffs.

The Montréal Gazette teases the bin Laden tape and begins a series on Canadians and the Holy Land. The editorial board weighs in on the tsunamis.

In commentary, L. Ian MacDonald says Paul Martin should show leadership, starting with explaining to Canadians why Québec deserves special arrangements under “asymmetrical federalism.”

I can’t wait to hear him to explain in Victoria how Montrealers’ cases of diabetes are distinct, but suspect I will have to, and for quite some time.

Inside the Calgary Herald, the editorial board would like to see fireworks in the Alberta legislature.

Tom Olsen explains why Stephen Harper is not returning Ralph Klein’s phone calls:

“Ralph's the knuckle dragger, Stephen's the thoughtful would-be statesman taking account of the collective desires of an entire nation.

The perception of hostility between the two works for Harper, and it's not something he'll attempt to defuse anytime soon.”

Inside the Post, the editorial board poops on Canadian disaster relief. Paul Kedrosky says the CRTC is a disaster.

David Frum is back onto the low Canadian birthrate; one explanation is the tax system:

“Canadian families in which one spouse focuses all his effort on work and the other dedicates herself to home pay dramatically higher taxes than equally situated families in which both parents work. The Fraser Institute notes that a married man supporting a wife and two children on $50,000 per year can expect to pay about $4,600 in federal taxes. A family in which two partners each earn $25,000 will pay only about $2,100. Equal income, double taxes.

Lower taxes are always good for families. But it's even more important that taxes be lowered in ways that stop punishing families in which the mother leaves the workforce to stay home and raise children, because it is those families that produce the most children.”

The editorial board says Ralph Klein has been all talk, no action on health care:

“By this point, Mr. Klein probably doesn't have time to remake the entire health care system. But it would not be too much to ask that, after all the noise he's made about reform during his time in the Premier's office, he get the ball rolling by increasing Albertans' medicare options.”

Inside the Citizen, we learn that Premier McGuinty is planning to see the world, Ottawa consumers are confident and the spooks are watching us.

The editorial board comments on the Asian disaster, and wants Premier Danny Williams to apologize; whoever wrote it hasn’t the foggiest understanding of politics on the Rock:

“If he does not put the Maple Leaf back where it belongs and apologize for this astonishingly offensive gimmick, the voters of Newfoundland and Labrador should take note.”

In the Toronto Sun, Peter Worthington weighs in on the Ukraine election, Salim Mansur is onto the UN oil-for-food scandal.

In Ottawa, Val Sears says Paul Martin should sign onto missile defence. In Calgary, Paul Jackson says Martin is in a muddle.

Posted by Norman Spector on December 28, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Monday, December 27, 2004

Tsunami video

Here is a live video of the tsunami hitting Thailand.

Posted by Ezra Levant on December 27, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack

NORMAN'S SPECTATOR

From today's edition of NORMAN'S SPECTATOR, where the articles are hotlinked.

The devastating earthquake and tsunamis in Southeast Asia lead the news around the world. The Ukraine election also receives front-page attention.

The Washington Post had its man in the water and fronts a first-person account; it goes below the fold with a story about jet travel that will not bring back pleasant memories for Maher Arar.

The New York Timesman in Canada has been watching television in the Great White North and the paper stuffs his report on Québec’s “Les Bougon.”

In France, the homeless are digging in for another winter. Aside from Ukraine, Le Figaro looks at the Palestinian election.

Le Monde has some fun making fun of Belgium; Stephen Harper should read all about it.

In the UK, a Law Lord has mouthed off about the hunting ban. As of today, kids will be fined on the spot for vandalism. Brits are apathetic about religion.

Two more City-types have taken the fall over an investment scam. Tony Blair is being questioned about a vacation he did not report.

At home, Prime Minister Martin is away. He reported the vacation and it's been widely reported on.

Yesterday, the Star’s Graham Fraser defended Martin's meandering in Morocco, while John Crosbie pooped all over the PM.

Today, the papers are filled with wire copy. We learn, for example, that Paul Martin is CP’s newsmaker of the year.

This is not good news for the PM: It turns out that Sheila Fraser, the runner-up, again denied Martin an outright majority.

Back in the USA, the New York Times’ editorial board reflects on the earthquake. Bill Safire weighs in on Big Pharma. Anthony Cordesman wades in on winning in Iraq.

The Washington Post’s editorial board looks at the earthquake and at a shift in the Administration’s position on Darfur. Fred Hiatt looks at civil society in Iraq.

The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board took in “Hotel Rwanda” over the holidays and like it but it poops on the Administration’s new forestry rules.

Former Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta weighs in on the responsibility to protect.

Alexander Cockburn lets us know what makes him really angry. Jonathan Turley says Clarence Thomas could be the next Chief Justice.

In The Wall Street Journal, Jonathan Rauch says US voters have rejected same-sex marriage and a cooling-off period is needed.

Pete Du Pont says 2004 was a good year for democrats. John Fund profiles Ukraine ’s new First Lady.

The editorial board has read the fine-print in California ’s stem-cell research initiative:

“The law, which passed with 59% of the vote and vocal support from Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, authorizes $3 billion in bonds to pay for new research and facilities. And even though the interest rate will double the ultimate cost over 10 years, backers of the initiative said that the money raised from the bonds won't cost the state anything for the first five.

Or so most Californians thought before a recent report in the San Francisco Chronicle noting that the Prop. 71 campaign misrepresented the measure in major ways. In fact, says the paper, "Interest payments will begin immediately, paid out of the bond money itself -- meaning that tens to hundreds of millions of `research' dollars must be used to pay debt service."

Moreover, the law says the research money doesn't even have to be spent on embryonic stem-cell studies. It can go to "other scientific and medical research and technologies" to be determined by the independent governing board. Topping things off is a provision that hamstrings Sacramento with respect to any changes. Prop. 71 can't be modified for three years, and then 70% of both Houses and the Governor must approve any tinkering.”

Here at home, the National Post editorial board says Donald Rumsfeld should resign. The Post's front page is all-tsunami.

The Ottawa Citizen fronts Ukraine and the tsunamis, including the Canadian angle, and follows up on the Afghan boy who had cardiac surgery in Toronto. Inside, Richard Foot begins a new series on privacy threats.

The Toronto Star fronts the tsunamis and the Toronto angle and has its European correspondent in Kyiv.

The Globe and Mail fronts the tsunamis, a Canadian survivor, Ukraine and Roy MacGregor on Saskatoon.

Inside the Globe, William Thorsell says Kofi Annan should be replaced by Brian Mulroney as top man at the UN:

“His relationships with U.S. congressional leaders are personal and bipartisan, eclipsed only by his friendship with the Family Bush.

Here in Canada, Prime Minister Paul Martin is a political foe but proper friend of Mr. Mulroney, and ambitious for a new multilateralism in which Canada plays a significant role. (If Mr. Mulroney could appoint Stephen Lewis as Canada 's ambassador to the UN, can Paul Martin support Brian Mulroney as secretary-general?) The “scandals” that dogged Mr. Mulroney after his retirement as prime minister have collapsed under heaps of baseless accusations, and would not likely affect the broader landscape now.

The world needs a UN secretary-general who is more than a civil servant. In 2006 — or sooner — Mr. Mulroney remains a compelling candidate for the job.”

Ron Haggart weighs in on the Arar affair; I think that, in his anti-American diatribe, he minimizes the butt-protection going on in Ottawa:

“In pursuing its obligation to assure its people that the Maher Arar case can never happen again, Ottawa has only one logical choice. It must reveal every e-mail, every memo, every note of every phone call, every briefing, that put Maher Arar on the road to Syria.

This will greatly offend the Americans; the Bush administration might well thereafter ignore Canada. Given the record, that's not such a bad result.”

Yours truly demands to know why the hell Paul Martin is discriminating against all the adult women out there who would want to be his--or your--second wife. Or husband. And vice versa.

Inside the National Post, David Dodge is praised by business. Lorne Gunter wants the Gitmo 200 freed. Allan Gotlieb weighs in on choosing our next ambassador to Washington :

“If Mr. Martin were to depart from the long-standing tradition guiding our selection of ambassador to Washington , it would have a serious impact on morale in our foreign service. To remove such a post from the aspirations of foreign-service personnel is bound to affect the career choice of aspiring young Canadians….

As things stand, all indications are that the PM will appoint either Mr. McKenna or Mr. Peterson to the post. Both men are deservedly admired for their personality and abilities. But whomever Mr. Martin asks should bear certain things in mind. He should be prepared to work harder than at any time in his life. (Much of the real work begins after dark.) He should not be judgmental or allow personal political preferences to get in the way of improving the Canada-U.S. relationship. And he should be a problem solver, not a moralist. While he should strive to gain entry to the countless salons and social encounters where ideas are debated, he must, at the same time, be a lobbyist and advocate, perpetually on duty. He needs to develop an understanding of the U.S. political system that rivals that of the most learned experts. Not least of all, he should be prepared to be unpopular with the folks back home by telling them when the U.S. position is right and the Canadian one wrong.

And, oh yes, it would help if he liked Americans.”

Posted by Norman Spector on December 27, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sunday, December 26, 2004

Polygamy is coming

Not that us lowly citizens will have any say in the matter, as with gay marriage this is an issue that will be strictly handled by our betters. So I bring this news from the UK merely to inform you what will be happening soon in our future. Second wives may get tax break:

THE Inland Revenue is considering recognising polygamy for some religious groups for tax purposes. Officials have agreed to examine “family friendly” representations from Muslims who take up to four wives under sharia, the laws derived from the Koran.

Existing rules allow only one wife for inheritance tax purposes. The Revenue has been asked to relax this so that a husband’s estate can be divided tax-free between several wives.

The move is bound to create controversy if it leads to a change in the rules. It is seen as a breakthrough by Muslim leaders who have been campaigning to incorporate sharia into British domestic law.

Once this type of precedent is established on one issue in one jurisdiction I have no doubt the precedent will be used to inexorably spread the normalization of polygamy until it, too, is read into the Charter of Rights.

Posted by Kevin Jaeger on December 26, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack

Same-sex marriage

These results, which are reported in La Presse but not in any English-language papers today, are consistent with previous results that have also been under-reported.

OTTAWA -- A new poll suggests same-sex marriage could have an effect on the next federal election.
Broadcast News
Sun 26 Dec 2004

OTTAWA -- A new poll suggests same-sex marriage could have an effect on the next federal election.

Twenty per cent of Canadians surveyed by Decima Research say the views of their M-P's on the issue could sway how they vote.

The poll highlights deep divisions.

Thirty-nine per cent of respondents say they support gay marriage-- while 37 per cent are against it.

The rest are undecided or did not respond.

Opposition to same-sex weddings is higher among older voters and those in Atlantic Canada and the Prairie provinces....

The poll of just over one-thousand people is considered accurate within three percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Posted by Norman Spector on December 26, 2004 | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack