Justin Trudeau's little Liberal lies

Further to my earlier post, where Justin Trudeau was claiming that he was being 'taken out of context'...

...now we have this Nov.24, 2012 report by Mark Dunn:

"Justin Trudeau said Friday he was only bad-mouthing one Albertan in a televised rant that has come back to haunt his quest to follow in his father's footsteps and become prime minister.

The Liberal leadership hopeful used a hastily called news conference in Vancouver to issue what critics called a half-hearted apology to wiggle out of a jam opponents have seized on to paint the Liberal party as anti-Alberta.

Trudeau's campaign hit the skids Thursday when a French interview he gave two years ago surfaced with him bemoaning western influence on national affairs and arguing that Canada does better under prime ministers from Quebec.

On Alberta, Trudeau said he didn't mean to smear the whole province - just Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

"I'm sorry I said what I did," he said. "I was wrong to relate the area of the country that Mr. Harper is from with the people who live there and with the policies that he has that don't represent the values of most Canadians."..."

So, basically, all the excuses which Justin Trudeau had made, just two days ago, have already been revealed as Liberal lies!! Incredible! We can only imagine mini-Trudeau's Great Radiant Liberal Future.

Now we see there was nothing "taken out of context", as Justin pretended there was, two days ago, after he was caught trying to explain away that forked tongue act of his, revealed in that Quebec interview.

Now we see that Justin, the Grit grifter, was saying one thing here, and another there, all the while pretending in his campaign that he wasn't!! Another calculated Liberal lie.

Even his half-hearted apology should be seen as a lie, for what Justin Trudeau was saying in Quebec was the real, smug Trudeau. Justin wasn't sorry for anything, until his hypocrisy caught up with him while he was grifting for votes in Alberta, cowboy hat and all. Then he lied. Then changed his story, again.

The only person Justin Trudeau has managed to smear, is himself.

The Liberals need this kind of inept two-faced bumbler to become the third stooge [well, Bob Rae is just the Liberal Shemp] to complete their Great Triumvirate of Liberal Leader-Bufoons-in-the-Wilderness: Dion, Ignatieff, and Trudeau ...oh, that would be great...
*

Niagara press refuses to examine climate-record of McGuinty's GreenFear-monger Jim Bradley

In "Climate-free U.S. debates" (National Post, paper edition, Oct.24, 2012) Climate Depot’s Marc Morano issued a statement on Oct. 23, 2012: 

It is very surprising to see three presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate pass without a single mention of climate change. This is the first time this has happened since global warming hit the national stage in 1988. Global warming activists are justifiably outraged by this. After all, Obama declared in April of this year to Rolling Stone that he would make global warming a key campaign issue in 2012. Obama let down a key part of his political base by going silent on climate.
What happened? How did climate change get reduced to a comedic punch line in the 2012 presidential campaign?
The answer is clear. The man-made global warming fear movement never overcame having a partisan figure like Al Gore being its public face and suffered from having the scandal-ridden and distrusted UN IPCC as the source of its science.
Perhaps the most important factor in the climate silence in the 2012 presidential race was a result of the forced vote in the House of Representatives to pass a cap-and-trade bill in 2009, which helped fuel the rise of the Tea Party movement in the U.S. No longer could a politician regurgitate the standard global warming claims of consensus and the need to “act” without facing laughter and derision from angry crowds.

*
The St.Catharines Standard and Niagara This Week have never bothered asking Ontario's primary GreenFear-monger, Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, about where Good Ole Green Jimmy obtained his still-secret-as-of-Oct.-2012 "global warming" evidence.
The local Niagara press giddily, unquestioningly, parroted the climatalarmism peddled from Chretien, Martin, Lastewka, Dion, Ignatieff, McGuinty, Smitherman, Duguid, Jim Bradley, Ban-Ka-Boom, Suzuki, and Gore.

The Niagara press never overcame their own internal partisan biases. They accepted the "global-warming ìs all settled" green-kool-aid from day one.

Neither Bradley, nor his GreenFear-mongering gaggle of Liberal colleagues, admirers, and sycophants, were EVER seriously challenged in Niagara's press, were they?!!


Look back at the St.Catharines Standard's years - decades, actually - of casual, loyal Liberal stenography, which was dutifully peddled as "journalism". Al Gore was lionized in Niagara's press, David Suzuki was fawned over, as was the IPCC, no real questions asked!!

Even after McGuinty announced his resignation on Oct.15, 2012, when he claimed with a straight face that Ontario's economy was his Liberals' most important concern (...oh, come on...!), neither the St.Catharines Standard, nor Niagara This Week, bothered to examine Jim Bradley's lengthy record of climate-fear-pushing ideology, or to examine how Bradley's ballyhooed green bolshevism directly contributed to his Liberals' costly destruction of Ontario's economy. Niagara's Liberal-besotted press was too afraid to make the link.


Local Niagara mayors and councillors (many of them Liberal butt-wipers themselves) did "regurgitate the standard global-warming claims", peddling the GreenFear industry's consensus-science/political-science/junk-science (...as I had written yesterday...) and, they did - with all deluded serious urgency - warn/fearmonger us that we 'had to act' on phony and costly GreenFear-induced projects now-now-now to 'Save The Planet From Climate Doom'. Unbelievable.


The St.Catharines Standard knows all about this, since the Standard did its best to peddle such Liberal GreenFear lies without question; and the Standard did its best not to examine, nor laugh with derision or disdain, at the actions resulting from the outlandish climate-paranoia of the GreenFear-infected locals. Remember: we were all told we 'had to save the planet', at any cost: that was Jim Bradley's and his green-kool-aid-drinking sycophants' mantra.


The St. Catharines Standard has never asked their Buddy Liberal Environment Minister Jim Bradley, about why his Liberal government still peddles cap-and-trade, as evidenced on Jim GreenFear Bradley's own Ministry of Environment tax-payer-funded website; Ontarians should spend the time to visit Jim Bradley's toxic website, to see Jim Bradley's Liberal carnival of green bolshevism in all its unsubstantiated, bureaucratic, bullsh!t-laden glory, all paid for at our expense - in more ways than imaginable.
In particular, note the "Participating In Cap and Trade" section of Bradley's government-propaganda website.


Next, have a look at this May1, 2012 You Tube video of secretive GreenSlimebag Jim Bradley avoiding questions at Queen's Park, about his Liberal cap-and-trade schemes, while still spreading his unsubstantiated GreenFear about climate change!!!


You will see Jim Bradley's smug outright deception about there not being any Liberal cap-and-trade schemes, when all one has to do is visit Jim Bradley's own government website, mentioned above, where there is an entire page devoted to what Jim Bradley says his Liberals have no plans to do!


*
See Lorrie Goldstein's Jul. 25, 2015 column on Obama vs. Harper's climate mythology:


"...Obama is so politically delusional on the issue of man-made climate change, that he actually predicted at the start of his presidency that it would mark the moment, “when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”.
In that context, the free ride he has been given by the media on this subject, aided and abetted by politicians like Justin Trudeau, is an embarrassment to our profession.
By contrast, the media assessment of Harper — that’s he’s a skeptic on climate change who views the solutions as prohibitively expensive and pays only lip service to the issue — is accurate.
Now consider Obama’s record.
He never even tried to ratify the now-defunct Kyoto accord, as opposed to Harper, who legally withdrew Canada from it.
Obama took one shot at putting a price on U.S. emissions, failed, and gave up. Harper never supported the idea, except for the brief period when Obama did.
Under Obama, the U.S. has become the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas.
Obama has approved enough new oil and gas pipelines in the U.S. to more than encircle the Earth — except, hypocritically, for the Keystone XL, so he can play up his non-existent green credentials to a gullible media, especially in Canada.
Obama recently approved drilling for oil in the Arctic Ocean, despite the Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico during his presidency, that led to the worst oil spill in U.S. history.
Under Obama, U.S. coal exports — the dirtiest fossil fuel — to Asia and Europe hit record levels in 2012. (Recently have they fallen back, somewhat.)
Obama’s so-called “historic” deal on emissions with China — the world’s number one emitter, while the U.S. is number two — is a non-binding, unenforceable wish list the two countries might do someday, long after Obama, whose term ends in January 2017, is gone.
Obama’s domestic commitments to reduce U.S. GHG emissions are no more believable, or doable, than Harper’s.
And yet, when world leaders gather in Paris this December to take yet another crack at developing a global treaty on emissions, Obama will be treated as a saint by most of the media in attendance and Harper, if he’s still prime minister, as an ogre..."
*
Yep: ...and Niagara's local media climate-change-con-job-cabal - even in 2015 - will still continue giving their biased, scrutiny-free ride to GreenFear-pushing propagandists, and will still continue to propagate their standard GreenFear myths that Obama and Jim Bradley are not the actual ogres, but instead are climate-change-preventing gods...!
It is a mass-delusion.
*

Who will examine McGuinty's new environment minister Jim Bradley's years of GreenFear-mongering?

Here's some great Global-Warming GreenFear-mongering from the Oct. 19, 2011 Vancouver Sun, "Wallets will soon feel effect of climate change"; all that Metcalfe's Wrong-Righters at the St.Catharines Standard have to do is regurgitate the same kind of climate crap in Niagara, to justify Liberal Environment Minister Jim Bradley's green bolshevism. The GreenFear template is already there! Have a look at the climate fear being spread in B.C.:

"Higher costs for city water, rising home-insurance rates as sea levels rise, and programs to encourage people to leave their fossil-fuel-burning cars at home were cited Tuesday as ways that climate change is, or soon will be, hitting home for B.C. residents

That was the message from a panel at the opening session of BC Hydro's 2011 Power Smart Forum speaking on how a changing climate is affecting the business environment. Business, government and residents need to begin adapting so that the province will be more resilient as climate-change effects become more obvious, panelists said.
Research and talk about climate change are no longer enough, said Deborah Harford, executive director of Adaptation to Climate Change (ACT) at Simon Fraser University. She said costs that business and service providers will face include increased effects on health, energy production, food services and population movements due to rising sea levels.
And as the effects increase, she said, insurance companies will probably start raising rates if infrastructure has not been planned and developed to adapt to climate change.
Bob Purdy of the Fraser Basin Council said issues such as climate change are complex but actions can be taken, such as reducing emissions on transportation fleets, which also saves costs.
Harford said most British Columbians probably do not understand adaptation to climate change.
"They would say, 'Do we need this?'" she said of expenditures that would meet impending changes.
Local governments are already adapting by undertaking long-term measures, she said, citing some of the initiatives at the City of Vancouver.
Peter Judd, general manager of Vancouver's engineering services, said the city has already implemented programs, like the downtown bicycle lanes, that are responses to climate change. Strategies are also underway to adapt to climateinduced changes to the city's water supply, which will likely be affected by drier summers.
Judd said drinking water will be more expensive. In a later interview, he expanded on the water issue, saying the city is prepared to require new residential housing to have water meters installed beginning Jan. 1, 2012. All that's needed is city council's final approval.
There will also be a rate structure to encourage residents to reduce their water use, he said, but added that ultimately, the need to conserve will mean water rates are going to go up.
"The thing that we have an opportunity to do here is to actually reduce the long-term costs. If we can reduce the amount of water we are using, we can put off or eliminate major expenses like raising the dams in the region," he said.
"One of the challenges that we have is that we expect to be facing hotter, drier summers and more intense storms in the winter. The response to some of those things, like water conservation and droughtresistant plants, are the kinds of responses that you need to address," said Judd.
He said the prospect of rising sea levels is one of the biggest challenges the city is struggling with now.
And the city's controversial downtown bike lanes, he said, are part of the city's climatechange strategy. They are aimed not only at today's bike commuters, but also at the next generation.
"We have to make sure there are alternatives for people who haven't started driving yet."
Judd said the city is adapting to more severe and more frequent storms by increasing the size of the storm-sewer pipes.
The primary need is to replace the old system where storm drains and sewage were combined in a single pipe, but at the same time the city is installing wider pipes dedicated solely to storm run-off, he said.
Already, the city has recorded an increase in rainfall along with more severe rainstorms."
*

Scared yet of the man-made GreenFear phoniness?!
Think the above greenshevism isn't enough - how about this piece of GreenFear by Ray Grigg, Special to the Courier-Islander, August 12, 2011:

"Responsibility for reducing carbon dioxide emissions is falling to cities, municipalities and regional districts because wider efforts during the last 30 years to ameliorate the threat of global climate change are not working. Multiple negotiations sponsored by the United Nation's have been unsuccessful. Developing nations such as China, India and Brazil are determined to follow the destructive example of industrialized countries which, in turn, are reluctant to risk economic advantage by reducing their emissions.

Canada, under the Harper government, is so disconnected from climate science that it seems to live in parallel and separate universe, one that systematically obstructs reduction efforts, assiduously suppresses climate change discussions, silences climatologists, shrinks relevant federal research programs, pushes for greater oil and gas production, and abets coal exports. BC's government is only marginally better.

The situation is moving from serious to critical, according to the International Energy Agency that monitors global CO2 emissions. Emissions in 2010 broke a dubious record - 30.6 billion tonnes (Gt or gigatonnes) or 1.6 Gt over 2009's 29.0 Gt. The 5.52 per cent increase was also unprecedented, representing a nearly unbroken succession of yearly rises - the so-called "Great Recession" cut 2008's 29.3 Gt to 29.0 Gt in 2009 (Guardian Weekly, June 3/11).

Climatologists warn that we cannot exceed 2.0 C without invoking "dangerous climate change". To maintain any reasonable measure of safety, they estimate that 32.0 Gt of carbon dioxide is the maximum we can emit by 2020. However, if present trends continue, we will reach this threshold nine years early, "making it all but impossible to hold warming to a manageable degree" (Ibid.). The end of this century, therefore, could see average temperature increases of 4.0 C or more, about six times the temperature increase from the Industrial Revolution to the present. (Climatologists calculate that 32.0 Gt per year is not a safe level of emissions but the maximum before they must gradually be reduced to zero. Even during this transition we risk inducing serious climate change and destroying the marine ecology with fatal acidification.)

CO2 emissions are the key environmental force affecting almost every other corrective environmental action we undertake. We cannot restore wild salmon runs if rivers are too hot for fish and oceans are too acetic for marine life. We cannot protect endangered ecologies if temperatures rise above levels species can tolerate. We cannot sustain agriculture if the weather is too extreme for crops. We cannot cope with displaced people if hundreds of millions are fleeing rising oceans, drought, floods and unprecedented storms.

Unlike the federal and provincial governments that have been incapable of reducing CO2 emissions, cities, municipalities and regional districts are closer to the grassroots of communities. Their smaller size allows them to be more responsive and manoeuvrable, better able to initiate the many incremental reductions that can have a huge cumulative effect on total greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, this is what many of them have already done. And given the overall severity of the emissions challenge, this should be the primary guiding principle of all local planning and development.

Several helpful options exist. First is to increase population density downtown. This concentration of people has multiple advantages, all of which are efficiencies that directly or indirectly lower CO2 emissions. Walking, biking or using public transit reduces the need for cars, long commutes from the suburbs, and the costly matter of building roads and servicing dispersed properties. As collateral benefits, city centres become more vibrant, social, interesting, healthy and safe. Public services such as schools, hospitals, libraries, water, sewage and law enforcement are easier and cheaper to provide. Think medieval towns and cities. Their efficiency has been tested and proven during the centuries before we had the energizing power of fossil fuels.

Garbage is a topical problem these days as landfill sites fill and methane escapes from existing dumps - methane is a greenhouse gas about 20-times more powerful than CO2. Burning is probably the worst option for garbage disposal because it emits CO2 and innumerable toxins. Expensive incinerators also commit communities to long-term agreements and eliminate better options as they come available. The best option is careful household streaming of garbage that can then be composted, recycled or stored. Sophisticated technologies such as anaerobic digesters and thermal depolymerization can process waste into reusable materials, thus creating useful heat, oil, gases and solids that can substitute for non-renewable resources.

The two communities of Campbell River and the Comox Valley both have problems with coal, the former with Quinsam Coal that is almost certainly polluting an important watershed, and the latter with a proposed Raven coal mine that will inevitably cause similar environmental problems if it is allowed to proceed. But the fundamental problem with coal is that it is a dirty and polluting fuel. When burned, coal emits toxic materials that compromise human health - every year coal kills 13,000 American prematurely, incurring $100 billion in health costs - and it is the major global source of carbon dioxide emissions. Coal mines are also a source of methane - whether surface or underground, they are essentially open methane wells that release large quantities of this harmful greenhouse gas. If less coal were mined, this would force up its price, thus encouraging efficiencies and cleaner alternatives.

Climatologists warn that we are reaching a critical tipping point in our misadventure with fossil fuels. If senior governments are not capable of curbing greenhouse emissions, then the responsibility for corrective measures falls to local communities and individuals. Given the evidence of all other failures, this is the place where important change must begin."
*
Scared yet?!
The above kind of GreenFear crap is the same kind of GreenFear crap which Liberal Jim Bradley and his Ontario Liberals also most assuredly believe in.

We've heard this same kind of climate-change / global-warming-fear spread in Niagara, as well, by the Jim Bradleys, by the Brian McMullans, the Walt Lastewkas, the Jim Diodatis, the Stephane Dions, the Iggy Poops, the Gary Burroughes'... the same global warming fear-mongering, inevitably and predictably coupled with the same bolshevik GreenFear thuggery which is then offered - sorry, FORCED - upon the population as a supposed green "cure".

In St.Catharines, Liberal Jim Bradley has been babbling about global warming for years. The local newspapers have NEVER demanded any specific evidence from Jim Bradley to justify his "solutions" to the "problems" of  "man-made global warming".

Wendy Metcalfe, the St.Catharines Standard boss, and Mike Williscraft, the Niagara This Week chief, can maybe check their files, going back... ohh... I dunno - how about, say... twenty years (is that long enough?) - and recount for readers exactly how many interviews they have had regarding Jim Bradley and the issue of climate change /global warming; and how many times Jim Bradley had ever been publicly asked by the press to actually cite the specific AGW evidence which he (supposedly!) had, and which he has since used to justify his Liberal greenshevism.

They'll find nothing; if anything, the local Niagara press has fawned over and supported - mostly with little-to-no serious criticism - Bradley's GreenFear policies, from the beginning.

Now, in Oct.2011, that Jim Bradley, the Liberal GreenFear kyodiot, has become McGuinty's environment minister, do you think that the St.Catharines Standard's Wendy Metcalfe, or Niagara This Week's Mike Williscraft, will dare ask Jim Bradley about his specific evidence of AGW / man-made climate-change / global-warming, or whatever Jim's calling his GreenSocialism these days? Or will the Metcalfe/Williscraft gang continue to kiss Jim Bradley's Liberal ass, without question?

Since Jim Bradley was thrown out of the House in Queen's Park in October 2002, back when he was GreenFear-mongering about Kyoto, will Metcalfe or Williscraft now - in October 2011 - ask their local Niagara Liberal MPP Jim Bradley to publicly provide the SPECIFIC evidence which Bradley had at the time, extant in 2002, to support his GreenFear-mongering?

Jim Bradley has never actually provided any evidence to support his Green Fear-mongering actions. And yet, Bradley's Bootlickers in the press - a decade later - still haven't bothered to ask, either; whatever crap came out of Bradley's Liberal yap, was considered sacrosanct; whatever Liberal Jim Bradley spewed was unquestioningly considered as "it's all-settled" green gospel from Ole Jimmy, Ontario's Holy Greenness, Gaia's Protector, and Canada's Environmentalist's Saint.

The Bradley Bootlickers STILL are not asking, even though Jim Bradley is Ontario's environment minister again; and not one report has emerged from the local Niagara press compiling and investigating Bradley's so-called "scientific evidence" which influenced Bradley's GreenFear bolshevism.

Let's go back even further than 2002; let's go back to 1991; the local Niagara press has never bothered to question [let alone report!] Jim Bradley's "beliefs" as reported in a July 21, 1991 Ottawa Citizen story:

Jim Bradley was Ontario's environment minister from 1985 to 1990, when the province cleaned up much of its acid rain and started enforcing pollution laws to the letter. The Liberal MPP for St. Catharines lists overpopulation, global warming, depletion of the ozone layer, discharge of persistent toxins, and deforestation of tropical and temperate forests.

In 1991, Jim Bradley listed overpopulation, global warming, deforestation, etc; are these still his priorities today, in 2011? Why hasn't anyone for Niagara - and as far as I can tell, anyone in Ontario [!] - specifically asked him?

No-one really knows what retro-environment-minister Jim Bradley's specific motivations and justifications are - or were.

The local press in his own city of St.Catharines and Niagara region has avoided asking Jim Bradley to justify his Malthusian "over population" fears and his global warming fear-mongering.


*Where; who; what specifically; which specific scientific "evidence", did Jim Bradley actually cite as justification for his "beliefs" in 1991?

*Where was Jim Bradley's publicly-cited specific scientific "evidence" for AGW in 2002??

*Where is Bradley's AGW evidence (obviously, the same evidence which Bradley must have [albeit, secretly!] already had in 1991!) today, in 2011???

When will Niagara's media moguls Wendy Metcalfe or Mike Williscraft bother to actually ask Jim Bradley - now McGuinty's environment minister in 2011 - specific questions about Bradley's decades of global warming deceptions?

Perhaps - in light of the above; in context to the above; and in context to McGuinty's appointment of Jim Bradley as Ontario's new environment minister - Niagara's press barons Metcalfe and Williscraft can bother themselves ever-so-briefly to read...

- Peter Foster's Oct.22, 2011 National Post story "A thoroughly political body", 
- and Donna Laframboise's Oct.22, 2011 National Post story  "Conspiracy of silence",
- as well as Laframboise's Oct.25, 2011 National Post story "IPCC's activist 'experts' "  (both articles excerpts from Laframboise's new book "The Delinquent Teenager")

...and then examine how Liberal MPP Jim Bradley has managed to skate his way through two+ decades of his GreenFear peddling, without any scrutiny.

Talk about a 'conspiracy of silence' at the IPCC; the same thing happened here with Jim Bradley!
There was a similar conspiracy of silence/acceptance/acquiescence right in Niagara as well; for years, Liberal Jim Bradley was aided and abetted by a fawning local press which acted more like a defense line on Bradley's team, than an inquisitive, impartial press. For years, there was never any real examination locally in Niagara regarding what Bradley was saying; what Bradley was doing;  what, if any, evidence he had... whatever Bradley said about AGW was essentially left unquestioned and politely accepted as gospel. 

It appears that the same scenario remains in Niagara in 2011 - even though Bradley is (again) now Ontario's secretive, toxic Liberal environment minister.

*

Liberal Joyce Morocco discovers her local friggin' Liberal health-care system

Intriguing article in the July 20, 2011 St. Catharines Standard about a patient who collapsed in her car in front of the Niagara Falls Ont. hospital's Emergency Department, while her husband rushed into the hospital to find help; he was told TO CALL 911 (from the hospital!) while no-one assisted as his wife was gasping for air in their vehicle outside the ER!!
The woman in question was later quoted saying "No wonder our friggin' health care system is such a friggin' mess".
Turns out that this suddenly-enlightened soul, who was wondering about the friggin' mess of her friggin' health care system, was Joyce Morocco, ironically, also a  Niagara Falls Liberal, who ran federally in the 2008 election.(...strangely... hardeeharhar ...the St.Catharines Standard, Niagara This week, and other so-called independent local bloggerists didn't bother mentioning that this was a Liberal who was left in the parking lot by McGuinty's Liberal health-monopoly; apparently, this wasn't relevant, huh??!)
Honestly, Joyce... and Jim Diodati.... and Kim Craitor... seriously: these Liberals (they are Liberals, make no mistake) really still DON'T KNOW what's wrong with their own despotic Liberal monopolist health-care idiocy?
Good Lord.
Whose system is a "friggin' mess", Joyce: IT'S YOUR FRIGGIN' LIBERAL DREAM MONOPOLIST SYSTEM which is a friggin' mess, isn't it?! This is the system of Iggy and Dion and McGuinty!!
Don't you friggin' Grits friggin' get it??
You still don't understand your own Liberal healthcare duplicity???
What exactly is this "friggin' mess" which Morocco just found out about?
What: is this suddenly news to her, what her secretive Liberal colleagues have done to healthcare in Ontario? Come on.
She had to unfortunately find out the hard way what much of the rest of (non-Liberal) Ontario already damn well knows. Guess the boogeyman blame on harris and nicholson will soon follow; after all -what's Dalton McGuinty got to do with any of this, eh??!!
Where were Liberals Morocco and Diodati when Craitor's McGuintyite Liberals were hiding from a public C. difficile inquiry in 2008; and now the same Liberal secrecy hangs in the air with two dozen C. diff dead in Niagara?
Has Morocco called her friggin' useless Liberal MPP yet?
Has Morocco called that secretive Liberal Jim Bradley yet?
Has Morocco called her Liberal premier yet?
And, what will this Liberal friggin' tell them - as if they give a friggin' frig about her!
They'll tell her what they've told the rest of us: Frig off: we're building the Glorious Future of Tommy Douglas; a couple of wayside anomalies here and there are part of the game.
So vote Liberal, folks, and vote often.
*

Climate-change GreenFear: Junk-science recycled into junkier politics

It would be nice for some of Niagara's GreenFear-spreaders to provide a local rebuttal to Rex Murphy's column, "Inviting the fox into the henhouse" (National Post, Jun.18, 2011):

"One of the disturbing practices revealed by the great cache of emails out of the University of East Anglia - the so-called Climategate emails - was the attempted shortcutting or corruption of the oh-so precious peer-review process. The emails contained clear declarations of how the grand viziers of climate science would lean on journals and reporters to make sure certain critics did not get the validation, the laying on of peer-reviewed hands, so critical to full participation in the great climate debate. This was most succinctly expressed by the beautiful quote from Dr. Phil Jones of East Anglia that, "We will keep them out somehow -even if we have to redefine what peer-review literature is."

Much of what the world bizarrely allows to be called climate "science" is a closetgame, an in-group referring to and reinforcing its own members. The insiders keep out those seen as interlopers and critics, vilify dissenters and labour to maintain a proprietary hold on the entire vast subject. It has been described very precisely as a "climate-assessment oligarchy." Less examined, or certainly less known to the general public, is how this in-group loops around itself. How the outside advocates buttress the inside scientists, and even -this is particularly noxious -how the outside advocates, the non-scientists, themselves become inside authorities.

It's the perfect propaganda circle. Advocates find themselves in government offices, or on panels appointed by politicians disposed towards the hyper-alarmism of global warming. On the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) boards and panels, like seeks out like. And when the IPCC issues one of its state-of-the-global-warming-world reports, legions of environmentalists, and their maddeningly sympathetic and uninquisitive friends in most of the press, shout out the latest dire warnings as if they were coming from the very mouth of Disinterested Science itself.

An early and particularly graphic illustration of this vicious circle came when the IPCC 2007 report warned that most the great Himalayan glaciers would melt by the year 2035. Not only was the claim of a massive melt the very height of ignorant nonsense -the sun would have to drop on the Earth to provoke a melt of this proportion - it was also plucked from a seven-year-old publication of the ever busy World Wildlife Federation (WWF). As the Times of London put it, the claim itself was "inherently ludicrous" culled from a "campaigning report" rather than "an academic paper," was not "subject of any scientific review" and despite all these shortcomings became "a key source for the IPCC ... [for] the section on the Himalayas."

A scare report, seven years old, from the an environmental advocacy group, became the key document for a major report released under the authority of the IPCC, the world's best and brightest global warming minds. Sir Isaac Newton would be so proud.

Now we have an even more telling illustration of this same sad, vicious circle. It was first reported on by Steven McIntyre on his blog, Climate Audit (and was run on the FP Comment page of Friday's National Post). McIntyre revealed that the IPCC used a Greenpeace campaigner to write a key part of its report on renewable energy and to make the astonishing claim that "close to 80% of the world's energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies." He further revealed that the claim arose from a "joint publication of Greenpeace and the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC)." And it turns out that while working for the IPCC, the Greenpeace campaigner approvingly cited a Greenpeace report that he himself was the lead author of. He peer-reviewed himself.

A report on renewables, by the Renewable Energy Council of Europe, and Greenpeace, peer-reviewd by the man who wrote it. All they need add is a citation from the Suzuki Foundation and an endorsement from Elizabeth May and "the science will be settled" forever.

This is not just letting the fox into the hen house. This is giving him the keys, passing him the barbeque sauce and pointing his way to the broiler. Or, as McIntyre put it in plainer terms: "A lead author of the IPCC report, and of the hyped 80% scenario, is Sven Teske of Greenpeace International, whose official contribution is essentially based on a Greenpeace report cooked up with Europe's renewable energy industry."

Kind people may put this down to pure sloppiness on the part of the IPCC. Coming after its disastrous handling of the Himalayan glacier melt, however, it looks to me more like deliberate mischief. The IPCC cannot be that stupid by chance. Why these stories, and others of comparable magnitude, have not worked their way into the consciousness of the world's politicians despite such clear demonstrations of the IPCC's ramshackle processes is a mystery. But thanks to Steve McIntyre and others of nearequal courage, standing firm against the rage and mockery of the alarmist warming establishment, at least some of the IPCC's dubious and chillingly erroneous practices are revealed."
*
Let's ask Liberal MPP Jim Bradley - Ontario's chief climate-change / global-warming bullshit artist - to comment on Murphy's story.
C'mon there, Jimmy, Ole Feller - spill your secrets! Tell Ontarians the ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC BASIS for your Kyoto agitation, and your green bolshevik climate lies!!
Yep - Liberal Jim Bradley has never publicly revealed  his basis, his sources, his influences, his... um... "reasoning" - for pulling his green climate fraud onto the province of Ontario.
Jimmy's had plenty of chances to provide a detailed explanation - and, we're still waiting!! [For decades, Niagara's media has been loathe to question Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's GreenFear-based climatalarmism.]
Jim Bradley is not the only climate-change-global-warming fear-mongering greenshevik in Niagara - let's get St.Catharines joke of a mayor Brian McMullan's response to Murphy's story!
McMullan doesn't think he has to provide any answers either for his deluded climate fear-spreading - McMullan partnered the City of St.Catharines up WITH the WWF for all those earth-day-turn-out-the-lights propaganda efforts for the last several years - has anybody asked Mayor McFullofit to actually prove that sitting in the dark for a symbolic hour is anything more than symbolic - and fraudulently symbolic, at that?
What a green-con-artist. [...and, year after year, Niagara's complicit press runs the earth day hokum WWF/McMullan propaganda, NO QUESTIONS ASKED!!]
It's sheer lunacy: GreenFear TM paranoia manifested in duplicitous publicly-funded policy.
How about that other local climate-change-fear-monger, Liberal mayor of Niagara Falls, Jim Diodati - ditto for him, as well - let's ask Diodati to offically explain the "causes" of  "global-warming" - and then let's ask Diodati to explain the role of water vapour and the sun in creating GHG; then let's also ask Diodati about Niagara Falls' role in contributing to "climate-change", and why he's not stopping the creation of Niagara's dangerous, vaporous planet-killing mists!
These green-pandering political hacks are perpetrating a massive fraud, using junk-science from Al Gore's ass to scare citizens into adopting green socialism - former Liberal MP Walter Lastewka did it, Liberal joke Stephane 'Bumbledore' Dion did it, Michael Ignatieff did it, now the Conservatives are even getting into it... all based on a 'consensus' mirage, recycling junk-science into junkier politics.
Then we had a report by Kristy Kirkup in the Jun.16, 2011 St.Catharines Standard telling us about more climate-change fear being spread by Jack - off MassageBoy Layton's NDP environment critic Megan Leslie.
Perhaps while the above-mentioned GreenFear-spreading kyodiots ignore responding to Murphy, they can also hide from and refuse to comment on these columns as well:

- Tom Harris'  No climate debate" (National Post,Jun.8, 2011)

-  Vivian Krause's  "Tarred by science: How green groups pursued oil sands agenda" (National Post, Jun.14, 2011)

- Terence Corcoran's  "Lipstick, Apples, & sperm count" (National Post, Jun.14, 2011)

- Terence Corcoran's "Greens 'lost' as growth prevails" (National Post, May 6, 2011)

- Terence Corcoran's  "No climate death in Venice"  (National Post, Jun.16, 2011)

*

So, let's fast forward to Howard Fischer's Dec. 8, 2017 Tuscon.com report "UA ordered to surrender emails to skeptics of human-caused climate change" which - all these GreenFear-propaganda-packed years later - is nevertheless still DIRECTLY linked to the phony 'hockey-stick' issue behind the initial Climategate scandal:

"The University of Arizona has been ordered to surrender emails by two UA scientists that a group claims will help prove that theories about human-caused climate change are false and part of a conspiracy.
Pima County Superior Court Judge James Marner rejected arguments by the Board of Regents that disclosure of the documents would be “contrary to the best interests of the state.”
Marner said it may be true that some of the documents sought by Energy & Environment Legal Institute might be classified as unpublished research, manuscripts, preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers and plans for future research.
But the judge said the subject matter of the documents has become available to the general public. And that, Marner said, does not allow the university to withhold disclosure under a separate section of the law governing university records.
There was no immediate response from the university.
The ruling is a turnabout for Marner, who had previously ruled that some emails were properly withheld because they contained things like confidential information or attorney work product. He said at the time that the university did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in withholding other documents, including unpublished data, research, drafts and commentary.
But last year the state Court of Appeals told Marner to take another look.
Appellate Judge Joseph Howard, writing for the unanimous court, said it’s legally irrelevant what university officials thought was appropriate to disclose.
He said everyone involved in the case acknowledges that the emails from Malcolm Hughes, who is still with the UA, and Jonathan Overpeck, who left earlier this year, are public records. Howard said state law carries a presumption that all public records are subject to disclosure, with certain exceptions.
That, Howard said, required Marner to examine the records to determine whether making them public would harm “the best interests of the state,” as the university has claimed.
Craig Richardson, president of E & E, said the request relates to so-called “hockey stick” research. It drew its name from graphs that climate scientists say show a long-term decline in global temperatures over most of the last 150 years followed by a sharp rise.
“It’s the foundational argument for really this whole climate change industry and their focus,” he said.
In 2009, some computer servers at the University of East Anglia in Britain were hacked and emails stolen, with the names of the two UA scientists found in the mix. Some of what was found was labeled “climategate” and is being used by groups to show that global warming is a conspiracy.
“They showed there were a lot of games being played with the data,” Richardson said.
He said that getting all the emails, including from the two scientists, will reveal “an unvarnished view of how the process works ... and how climate scientists on the other side of this have been shut out.”

I'm sure that , as usual, no one at the St. Catharines Standard will dare approach local Liberal GreenFear propagandists such as MPP Jim Bradley or MP Chris Bittle or the hack Diodati for their comment on this development regarding the "foundational argument" of their own GreenFear-based climate delusions - -  or to even ask them to provide 'evidence' of the scientific basis for the GreenFear which they constantly spout ('Dis ain't got nuttin' ta do wit Chrissy and da Jimmies..!). 
The local Niagara press allows these climate change hoaxters to peddle their climate fear policies without context or scrutiny.  

McGuinty and Chretien-era Liberals did nothing to "control" gas prices

It was grrrreat to read Don Fraser's front-page story in the May 12, 2011 St.Catharines Standard "Squeezed by record pump prices", where absolutely no mention was made of the local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, nor of Bradley's personal role in helping extenuate today's "record pump prices"! Yep: it's as if Good Ole Jimmy never had anything to do with any of this!!!
Now, it's as if Ole Jimbo had never written any price-control bills in the past - and then conveniently forgot about them for the last eight years!!
Now, it's as if Jim Bradley and Dalton McGuinty had never said that they could - and would, if elected - bring in laws to... umm... stop all the "gouging", all the "ripping-off", all the "price-fixing", all the "collusion" that was supposedly going on.
Yep: read the Standard today and it's as if the Liberals had never fraudulently presented themselves as 'controllers of gasoline prices' !!
[The St. Catharines Standard sure doesn't want you to remember any of that!! After all, why would the St.Catharines Standard - whose motto oughtta be " Happily doing Jim's political laundry since '77 " - want to remind the proletariat about Jim Bradley's Liberal lies and deceptions about controlling the price of gasoline?!?]
There's no need to remind loyal Liberal voters about JimBoyBradley's track record of smarmy lies and hypocrisy!!
Yeah: Jim Bradley - the Liberal liar from St.Catharines - along with that other gas-hole scumbag McGuinty - outright conned voters into believing that the Liberals would "control" gas prices. The St.Catharines Standard merrily went along with that narrative back then; yet today, there's not a damn word about the Liberals' past deceit on this very issue.
Today, there's nothin' from the St.Catharines Standard about how a sanctimonious Jim Bradley, at Queen's Park on May 4, 1999, had goaded the Conservatives to "pass my bill" about helping control gas prices.
Today, no-one from the St.Catharines Standard has bothered to recall for readers what specifically was in Bradley's private-member's bill.
Today, no-one from the Standard has asked Jim Bradley why his bill was never reintroduced and passed during the last eight years of McGuinty's Liberal majority.
What bias.
And of course, when real investigative reporting fails in this Standard report, who else do they turn to for gassy filler than Dan McTeague, the Liberal MP who was thankfully finally booted out of office when that disgusting Liberal Ignatieff was walloped in the May 2 election.
Reporter Fraser didn't explain to readers - and didn't bother to actually contact and ask McTeague to explain - why McTeague, for all his years in a Liberal majority federal government - also DID NOTHING to "control" oil prices!
Didn't McTeague also try to pass some kind of gas price control bill at the federal level?
OOPS! Why would the Standard want people to know about that, eh?!!! hee hee!
Yet: here's McTeague, like a bad penny, unquestioningly now being used as a source!
The St.Catharines Standard  - mysteriously (ha ha !) - also fails to mention, or to ask McTeague about, the role which former St.Catharines federal Liberal MP Walt Lastewka played in quashing his own Liberal colleague McTeague's gas price control bill!!
Say what??!!
Why should the local Liberal-lovin' proletariat wanna know 'bout that?!? The St.Catharines Standard really doesn't want to mention any of this! The locals don't need to know the direct roles which Liberals such as Jim Bradley, Walt Lastewka, and Dalton McGuinty played in creating today's "record pump prices"!
Then, in a May 13 St.Catharines Standard story ("Ottawa to investigate high gasoline prices" by Jonathan Jenkins) that same old Liberal, Gas-Tank McTeague, blames in particular the federal GST for higher gas prices, telling us it 'goes up lockstep with the price'.
No challenge was made by the reporter, who should have asked: say, there, Danny Boy, what "GST" is there in Ontario? Isn't it specifically the "HST" which you should be talking about? In particular - McGUINTY'S newly-implemented Liberal 8% tax-gouge on gasoline????????????!!!!!!!?!
Doesn't McGuinty's new 8% tax-grab on gas 'go up in lockstep with the price' ?!!
Astoundingly, Jenkins didn't bother to ask Liberal McTeague whether his Liberal buddy McGUINTY'S taxes had anything to do with the high price of gas!!!
And - of course - no one from the St.Catharines Standard will bother to recall for readers that Lastewka's Liberals also had called for 'investigations' into gas-price fixing by the Competition Bureau. Back then this was seen as a brave and heroic deed! Now, when Clement does the same, massageboy Jackoff Layton's dippers deride that as "inadequate" - without quite saying what exactly they would do!
And finally, let's not forget: when Chretien-era Liberal Lastewka was telling us that there was no evidence of any price fixing, Liberal MP Dan McTeague was also Lastewka's Liberal colleague at the time.
*
Fast forward to Oct.16, 2014, to a strange St.Catharines Standard editorial headed "Let's relish this rare drop in fuel prices", written by Peter Epp.
Reading this weirdo editorial, it's like Epp doesn't know any of the previous gasoline-price-voodoo which Ontario's Liberals were practicing!
Epp whines on about how gas prices are falling in Canada, and are "at five-year lows" (eg "as low as $1.14 in some parts of Ontario" on Wed. Oct. 15, 2014)
Epp calls it "a classic picture of supply and demand".
Hmm - yet, Epp for some strange reason never mentions what the Ontario Liberal's role was in this "classic picture of supply and demand"!!
Furthermore, there was NOT A WORD IN THIS PATHETIC ARTICLE about local Liberal MPP hack Jim Bradley!!
Funny, eh - seeing that Jim Bradley and his Liberals were the ones who were screwing up and attempting to interfere with the "supply and demand", by price fixing gasoline THEMSELVES!! That's classic LIBERAL MARKET INTERFERENCE.
"Editorialist" Epp just plain 'forgot' (hahaha) to mention Jim Bradley's decades-long attempt to score votes by promising to regulate gas prices!
Yep: suddenly, when gas prices are dropping, Jim Bradley is nowhere to be found on the pages of the St.Catharines Standard - the same paper which for years had loyally trumpeted Bradley's phony gas-price-control antics!!
Now - nothing.
In his editorial, Epp doesn't dare bother to link or context the Ontario Liberal's paranoia and hatred for everything oil, nor their phony global-warming / climate-change Green-Fearmongering.
Epp says "more oil is being produced globally" and that "the U.S.is pumping out more oil than Saudi Arabia"  - yet Epp doesn't link any of that to Jim Bradley and his oil-hating Ontario Liberals.
Jim Bradley was fear mongering about "peak oil" decades ago - yet now, that there's more oil, Epp doesn't bother to ask Niagara's chief peak oil propagandist about this??!
By purposefully excluding Jim Bradley from this editorial, Epp is just continuing the St.Catharines Standard's pathetic propensity for swathing their hero Jimmy in convenient Cones of Silence.
Epp spews out lines such as "After years of getting hosed at the pumps" - without specifying WHICH years, and by which standard he was measuring what "getting hosed" meant. That kind of line is just what Jim Bradley would have spewed in the past.
Peter Epp should specifically explain what he meant here; it is crap journalism for the St.Catharines Standard to write half-baked articles such as this.
Does Epp have evidence of gasoline price-fixing, or something?? Why didn't Epp ask Jim Bradley about it, then?
What the hell is Epp actually talking about? This just blowhard rhetoric.
Epp is the one hosing readers with his garbage.
Epp didn't bother to get Liberal Jim Bradley - the chief gas-price-fear-spreader in Niagara - to confirm or deny that we have been 'getting hosed at the pumps for years'.
Were these the years under Bradley and his Liberals, which Epp refers to??
Is that why Peter Epp purposefully neglected to interview Jim Bradley about falling gas prices - because this incongruity didn't jive with Bradley's (and the Standard's) GreenFear-mongering agenda?
*

Talk about ignorant clowns  - - fast forward to June 16 2021, around 3 pm when CHML Hamilton, Ontario Corus radio show host Scott Thompson was 'interviewing' the same old Dan Gas-Tank McTeague, this time about all the havoc created in Canada by the cancellation of various pipeline projects in Canada (thanks in part to dementia-laden Biden's demotards).

For years it was McTeague and his OWN Liberals who were pushing the same global warming lies which ended up with these current cancellations in 2021!!

They nowget what they craved - the destruction of Canada's economy. They were told; they didn't care to listen.

McTeague was PART of the PROBLEM - he helped CAUSE IT!! It's as if the ignorant show host knows nothing about it, pretending he doesn't even know what lines 3 and 5 are...  it beggars belief the level of idiocy common  in Canadian broadcasting. McTeague's role as a SOURCE in spreading massive amounts of  global warming fear - which led to the situation we are in today - wasn't dare mentioned in this weirdo interview.

McGuinty's Liberal scumbags hide from G20 responsibility

Antonella Artuso wrote in  "Province blames feds about G20 law" (Toronto Sun, Apr.28, 2011):

"Ontario is pointing the finger at the federal Conservatives following the release of a second damning report on its own secret G20 law.

Community Safety Minister Jim Bradley rebuffed calls for a provincial inquiry, arguing it wasn’t Ontario’s idea to hold the G20 Summit in downtown Toronto last June.

“This was a federally-initiated conference; this was a federally-initiated security operation,” Bradley said Thursday. “I didn’t ask that it be placed in downtown Toronto. I don’t know who did. The federal government insisted it be there.”

Bradley denied suggestions he might be inserting himself into the federal election campaign with his comments, saying that was certainly not his intention.

The minister formally released Thursday the report of former Chief Justice Roy McMurtry, who was asked by the Dalton McGuinty government to review the Public Works Protection Act (PWPA), a War Measures bill used by police to protect the security perimeter at the summit.

The public only found out the bill had been used to create a barrier around the downtown core after police began stopping, searching and even arresting citizens under its powers.

McMurtry says the Act should be repealed.

“The vagueness of the PWPA permits it to be used in situations when it is arguably not necessary and potentially abusive,” McMurtry reports. “In my view, the PWPA has been used for purposes beyond its original intent.”

Last December, Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin said the province’s PWPA essentially placed Torontonians under martial law over the weekend the city hosted world leaders.

Bradley said his government would introduce legislation to axe the legislation if re-elected in October.

Both the Tory and NDP opposition continued to call for more transparency on why the government chose to enact the legislation.

McMurtry’s report noted Ontario originally looked to Ottawa for more police powers, but was told officers had “sufficient” authority to deal with the G20 Summit.

“The Federal Deputy Minister was clear that in his view the police had sufficient authority at common law and in statute to secure these conferences,” the report says. “Similarly, the OPP were of the view that it was not necessary for the police forces to have any additional police powers, other than those already conferred by virtue of common law and statute...in order to secure the interdiction zones for the Summits.”

The PWPA was introduced in 1939 to protect the province’s hydro electric facilities from Nazi saboteurs, and more recently to permit courtroom searches and enable security at Ontario Power Generation’s power plants."

*

Despite what McGuinty's 'fixer', Jim Bradley, claims, it is actually Bradley, Rick Bartolucci, Dalton McGuinty and the rest of Ontario's scumbag Liberals who are directly to blame for the G20 law which they - not the feds - passed in secret!

What a duplicitous scumbag Jim Bradley has proven to be: the issue is all about his secretive Liberal government's G20 law  - not about whose idea it was to hold the meeting in Toronto!! Cut the crap, Jim!!

The issue is about whose idea it was to pass this fascist-state law IN SECRET !!

Hey, Jim: did McMurtry's report claim anywhere that any federal official participated in your provincial cabinet sessions the day that your Liberals passed your secret G20 law?! Were your Liberals forced by someone to pass this law in secret?!

C'mon Jimmy: out with it, you scumbag!! You're disingenuously blaming the federal government - so, tell us which federal officials passed the secret G20 law!!!! [Good Ole Jimmy's lyin' and tryin' to spin it that his Liberals had nothin' to do with any of this!! Typical!]

And why doesn't Bradley act immediately upon McMurtry's recommendations?! What's with the 'wait till we're re-elected' crap?! There's no need whatsoever to delay and wait for October!!  What arrogant, utterly disgusting dirtbags these Liberals are! 

If Iggy needs to know why his federal Liberals got creamed in Ontario, he should look no further than the smug disaster that has unfolded in Liberal Ontario under McGuinty. McGuinty's Liberal lies and incompetence have telegraphed to the federal ranks. Iggy can thank McGuinty and Dwight Duncan for all their "help" in making "Liberal" a "trustworthy" brand.
*

Andrew Gill vs. Jim Bradley - which Liberal is telling the truth?!

Further to the stories here and here...

...let's see whether McGuinty's Liberal MPP Jim Bradley can explain to Ignatieff's Liberal candidate Andrew Gill about Ontario's positions on corporate tax cuts and on building new jails!
That'd be fun to watch.
Will anyone from the St.Catharines Standard's JimmyBoyFanclub bother to ask Jimmy - or Andy - to 'splain themselves? Running the same Dewar cartoon in the St.Catharines Standard over and over isn't a substitute for real reporting, Ms.Bullis...
Seeing that Gill lives in Ontario, and seeing that his own local Liberal buddy MPP Bradley's government just handed down a Mar.29, 2011 budget which includes lowering corporate tax rates and building new prisons, will Gill swallow the pill and immediately and publicly lodge his protest to Bradley?!
Thought so... what Liberal hypocrisy.
Will Liberal Iggy publicly challenge and ridicule Liberal McGuinty about yesterday's Liberal budget, which stands in stark contrast to the Liberalism which Iggy preaches?!!
Thought so... what Liberal charlatans!
Dwight Duncan - McGuinty's Liberal finance minister, the Grit who wrote yesterday's budget (...ya know: with the tax cuts and jail-buildin') - nevertheless says he will campaign for Ignatieff  (...ya know, who is against tax cuts and jail-buildin'...!!)
The blatant partisan hypocrisy of these Liberal charlatans is exposed for all to see.
And speaking of charlatans, don't forget that our two-faced weasel Bradley himself doesn't really believe in tax cuts: during the Harris years, a sanctimonious Bradley made it abundantly clear that he opposed tax cuts!
But nowww...
*

Some facts to temper Ignatieff's and Gill's Liberal rhetoric

We have seen Iggy, the Liberal carpetbagger, and Andrew Gill campaigning together in Niagara, trying out their talking points. Carmen Chai examines some of this Liberal rhetoric in "The Gritty Reality":

"On Monday, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff accused the Conservatives of being the highest-spending, most wasteful government in history, referring to a list of expenses from stealth fighter jets to the G8/G20 summits last summer. How thrifty were the Liberals when they called the shots?

- Corporate tax cuts

The accusation:
Ignatieff says the Conservatives' cuts to corporate taxes will drain the government of billions in annual revenue.

The facts:
The current corporate tax rate fell to 16.5 per cent, effective Jan. 1, 2011. The Liberals would raise it back to 18 per cent, last year's level. Based on their calculations, that would generate $6 billion annually.
Under Jean Chretien's Liberal government from 1993 to 2003, the corporate tax rate sat at 28 per cent. By 2003, the Liberals had brought those tax rates down to about 23 per cent.
The Canada Revenue Agency says tax rates were 19.5 per cent in 2008 under Prime Minister Stephen Harper and slowly decreased. The Tories have said corporate tax rates will be reduced to 15 per cent by 2012; the Liberals say they will not do this.
But Stephane Dion, who led the federal Liberals' 2008 campaign, pledged to cut corporate taxes below the 18.5 per cent rate that the Conservatives proposed.
Dion argued that lower corporate tax rates were "powerful" weapons in helping with investing, and job creation.

- The cost of international summits

The accusation:
Ignatieff points to the $1-billion price tag for 72 hours of G8/G20 meetings last summer and says he would have held both summits in the Huntsville, Ont., region and saved millions.

The facts:
Officials decided the region couldn't house world delegates and international media. So the G20 summit, in Toronto, ended up costing $679 million. About $574.6 million was spent on security.
Canada shelled out a lot more, however, than other countries that have hosted similar summits. The 2009 G20 summit, for example, set the United Kingdom back $20 million, with another $28.6 million spent on security, according to research out of the University of Toronto.
In a July 2010 report, the U of T researchers say that between $129 million and $200 million was spent on Canada's 2002 G8 summit in Kananaskis, Alta.

- Fighter jets

The accusation:
Ignatieff says the Liberals would cancel a contract for 65 F-35 stealth fighter jets, instead spending $16 billion on health care.

The facts:
Costs of the program vary widely, with the parliamentary budget officer using a figure closer to $30 billion for the jets.
The Tories, however, say the deal not only helps the Canadian Forces, but contributes to the economy. Joining the U.S.-led Joint Strike Fighter program has provided Canadian companies with access to $12 billion in potential work over a 40-year period, they argue.
The Liberals significantly scaled back military spending in the 1990s to balance the books, but the decision angered U.S. officials who complained that Canada wasn't doing enough to help fight terrorism and protect North America.

- Government spending

The accusation:
Ignatieff says the government is out of control, because federal spending under Stephen Harper grew by 18 per cent in his first three years as prime minister.

The facts:
Government reports on fiscal spending show that expenses under the Harper government jumped from $222.2 billion in the 2006-07 year to $274.2 billion in 2009-10 — an 18.9 per cent increase. During Jean Chretien's first three years as prime minister, spending rose a modest 2.39 per cent, from $162.4 billion in 1992-93 to $170.2 billion in 1995-96. In 1996-1997, expenses were slashed to $158.6 billion from $170.2 billion the fiscal year before.

- PMO spending

The accusation:
The Liberals point to an "explosion" in ministers' and the prime minister's office budgets under Harper.

The facts:
The annual cost of Harper's office was nearly $10 million in 2009-2010, a 30 per cent jump over the previous two years. In 2009-10, the cost to run Harper's office was $9.89 million — compared to 8.1 million the previous year and $7.5 million in 2007-08. Documents tabled in Parliament show the entire Conservative cabinet's costs had increased by 16 per cent since 2007-08, when records of such expenses were first documented.
However, figures on government spending when the Liberals were in power aren't published, so there's no point of comparison. It was the Tories' accountability legislation that made it possible to track office spending."

*

Furthermore, it is really difficult to believe Iggy's sudden claim that he won't pursue a coalition in the future. That's an utter crock. With Ipsos putting the Conservatives at 43% support, the Grits 24% and the socialists at 16%, Iggy's best chance of power is through a coalition!
The Liberal and NDP pre-election charade will be to pretend that they are out to "win" an election as 'independent' parties; the reality is that with their existing combined 24%+16%, they are simply running to win a coalition, to take over government!!! [There's' your "Red Door" BACK DOOR analogy right back in yer face, Iggula]
The Cobblitionists' combined 40% vs. the Conservatives 43% makes Iggy's timing of this election call understandable - these are competitive numbers for them when seen this way: the upside is that the Libs could obtain a minority, being supported by Dippers (yeah, yeah, Ole Layton the "King Maker"...) and a separatist or two. So, that's the upside for Iggy, for pretending there is "no coalition"! The downside for Iggy is that the Conservatives obtain another minority, causing Iggy to do the whole Stephane Dion thing all over again - with Layton and a separatist or two!!
At that time, Iggy'll conveniently come up with a new nuance rationalizing his newly-changed-stance. Iggy'll tell us that a coalition, will... ahem... become 'a necessity', y'see, to 'save Canada from Harper' (or some such drivel) and that  'although we thought and said differently in March of 2011, in May 2011, things have changed, and so, we are 'forced' to enter into this coalition'... blah... blah...blah... y'see, how easy it will be for Iggy to do this?
The losers can get a win-win ! It's just that for the time being - until the election is over! - Iggy's gotta pretend that there's NO coalition! This would simply be a redux of Dion's 2008 gambit. The thing Layton and Iggy have learned this time around is to keep Duceppe out of it as long as possible.
We've seen a lot of Liberal liars; Iggy won't be the last to say one thing and do another,
We had the lying scumbag Dalton Pinocchio McGuinty in Ontario, with his 'I won't raise taxes' bald faced lies. Slimy Chretien with his GST lies and his free trade lies. Trudeau with his wage and price control lies. Even Stephane Dion was telling Canadians during the 2008 election that they couldn't have a coalition with the NDP; then, right after the election, lo and behold, Canadians found out the opposition had been contemplating coalition alliances as far back as the summer of 2008.
Trusting Ignatieff is just a waste of time. If Iggy and Layton want to merge their parties, and run under such a banner, then fine; but to carry on this subterfuge of  under-the-table alliances and shared-but-not-spoken interests while also pretending to be running as 'independents', is a charade.
An honest Iggy would have said - correctly - that the coalition option is always there in our parliamentary system (at a political price, though...); and that, he would consider it if conditions warranted it. (...and Dion's conditions included the Bloc...)
But, for Iggy to now outright deny any coalition, thereby boxing himself in after the election, is patently idiotic, and truly unbelievable, deservedly leaving Iggy open to yet more flip-flop-liar ridicule down the road.
This all shows that professor Ignatieff is not ready for prime-time and is in way over his head; his theoretical Liberalism doesn't resonate. The only way for Canada to move forward is with a Conservative majority, not another costly minority fiasco-in-the-making. This would give us stability, and pave the way for the necessary political housecleaning that obviously needs to happen in our federal dysfunctional parties.
The Liberals, under professor Ignatieff's tutelage, clearly still have not truly understood their post-Chretien lessons. The Libs 'time-for-reflection-in-the-political-wilderness' has not yielded any new-found purpose nor promise.
Ignatieff''s tiresome, sneerful bromides can't - and won't - lead this country.
*

Iggy conveniently ignores McGuinty's prison plans

Ignatieff was on Newstalk 1010 with John Tory on Mar.28, 2011; a sanctimonious Iggy once again blathered about the Conservative federal government building "super-prisons"; yet, isn't that exactly what Iggy's Liberal colleagues Dalton McGuinty and Jim Bradley are doing in Ontario?!

Seeing that Liberal carpetbagger  Ignatieff is a (parachuted) Ontario MPP, has Iggy publicly advised his own premier, McGuinty, to stop building 'super prisons'?
*

What is Bradley's position on the federal election?

So the Toronto Star tells us that Dalton McGuinty will be campaigning for his federal Liberal brother David during this unnecessary federal election.
How can slimy Liberal Dalton McGuinty - who is promoting provincial corporate tax-cuts - in all honesty campaign for his slimy Liberal sibling, who doesn't believe in corporate tax cuts?! Guess one of them's lyin'; guess it depends on where they are, who they're tryin' to con at any given time, and which way the wind is blowing...
Wonder if the St.Catharines Standard will bother to contact Good Ole Liberal MPP Jim Bradley and ask the Savant of Secord Dr. whether Jimmy'll be campaigning for Liberal Andrew Gill or for Michael Ignatieff?!!
oh yeah... Jimmy can't be reached....
Isn't it also funny how Iggyite Liberals such as Andy Gill sneer at the idea of building prisons (crime? what crime?! ) while at the same time, McGuintyite Liberals such as Public Safety Minister Jim Bradley want to... uh... build more prisons in Ontario.
You can bet the St.Catharines Standard won't bother asking any Grit to explain that, either.
*

Beware: Ignatieff's "coalition if necessary, but not necessarily coalition" threat is still in play

Coalition Redux, a new/old political horror play directed by Michael Ignatieff.

Hilarious how, suddenly, Ignatieff and his Liberals are pretending that they didn't want an election!!! Wow...
Also interesting to see how Iggy is hiding and ignoring questions about his coalition plans. (Iggy? Hidden agenda? What hidden agenda, eh?!!!!)
All Canadians need to recall power-hungry Iggy's record of past pronouncements; we need to remember Iggy's veiled implied threats as he constantly re-iterated his "Coalition if necessary, but not necessarily coalition" rhetoric.
Remember that two-faced Liberal gobbledygook from Professor Iggy?
Well, Iggy - who purports that he is so trustworthy and honest - still will NOT clarify his 2011 coalition plans with Duceppe and Layton. Iggy simply walked away from a reporters scrum when asked to specifically and publicly clarify his exact stance on a new 2011 re-cobbled coalition. [...Son of Cobbilition, coming soon to a riding near you...!]
All Canadians must remember that Ignatieff was not only eagerly threatening to overthrow a newly-and-duly-elected Canadian government last time, he was also a willing participant in Stephane Bumbledore Dion's failed leftist junta.
After being appointed as Bumbledore's Liberal successor, Ignatieff continued using his "coalition if necessary, but not necessarily coalition" threats.
Now Michael Ignatieff bleats on about 'honest democracy' (!) - while hiding his plans to create his own sequel, Coalition Part Two, in  2011!
Canadians need to see and understand, right here, right now, right from the get-go, that Ignatieff's coalition is STILL in existence; it has not gone away.
Bye-bye Iggy. You can get a cheap flight back to Harvard on Porter...
*

Liberal greenshevism - pay more, get less

Christina Blizzard wrote in "Wind Plans run out of gas" (Toronto Sun, Feb.16, 2011):

"Nothing like an election on the horizon, with the two frontrunning parties tied in the polls, to make a government see the light.
Or, in this case, the wind.
The McGuinty government has finally acknowledged what critics have long been saying.
Offshore wind farms really blow.
Quietly last week, the Liberals dropped plans to push ahead with off-shore wind farms, mostly planned for Lake Ontario and Lake Huron.
I've always thought the idea was more window-dressing -- build massive, unsightly wind farms in the middle of the lake in the hope voters will actually believe their government is going green.
Except, as any sailor will tell you, there simply isn't enough wind -- especially in Lake Ontario -- to make the plan worthwhile.
Energy Minister Brad Duguid said in an interview Monday there isn't enough science to push ahead with the projects.
"There is a need to develop the science before the ministry of the environment approves fresh water wind turbines," he said.
While there are saltwater windfarms, there aren't enough turbines in freshwater to study the environmental impact.
For example, freshwater is more likely to freeze. How will that affect the turbine?
Duguid said the government will still be able to reach its goal of bringing 10,700 MW of renewable power on-line by 2018.
Only one contract out of 1,300 contracts was offshore.
"We are very confident we will meet all our objectives in building the renewable energy we need to build to replace coal and maintain our position as a green energy leader with onshore projects.
"The decision on offshore will not have any noticeable effect on our objectives," he said.
The government has pledged to shut the province's coal-fired generating plants by 2014.
Duguid expects to make more announcements soon on new, "feed-in-tariff," (FIT) renewable energy projects.
Wind and other renewable energy programs are largely responsible for soaring energy costs.
The "global adjustment," or "provincial benefit" consumers who are signed up to energy retailers pay has pushed many homeowners' bills into the stratosphere.
That money is going to pay for renewable projects.
It's now worth about $4.2 billion a year, and growing.
When electricity prices were high, the global adjustment was a negative amount.
Now electricity is cheaper -- and the global adjustment is soaring.
It was largely the FIT program that led to the situation on New Year's Day, where we had to pay other jurisdictions to take our excess electricity off our hands.
January 1 was warm and windy. The wind turbines were turning - but industry was mostly shut down.
Ontario Power Generation had to spill water at Niagara - wasting the cheapest, greenest energy on the planet -- because FIT contracts require the province to buy wind energy first.
All of which could zap the Liberals in the upcoming election.
Premier Dalton McGuinty is touring the province with his travelling road show, trying to explain away the soaring hydro bills.
The Liberals are also trying to soften the blow of rapidly increasing prices by introducing a 10% credit on your hydro bills.
Still, they're adding $1 billion to the debt to do that, so you'll pay one way or another.
They can add it to your hydro bill. Or you can pay it on your income taxes. Or you can pass the bill along to generations yet unborn.
Which is what we've done in the past.
With windmills, what goes around comes around.
It's enough to make your head spin."

We can fondly thank that walking Liberal disaster George Smitherman for all the piles of stinking Liberal policy turds festering throughout Ontario.
Whether on health-care or energy, Smitherman was a damn disaster, yet - this is important to remember - Smitherman was personally chosen and fully supported by Dalton McGuinty! Just goes to show how impaired Dalton's judgement was.
McGuinty should be charged for 'ruling while politically impaired'.
It's hilarious pathetic how the local GreenFear-spreaders at the St.Catharines Standard haven't been able to dig up their green wizard, Good Ole Liberal Jim (the 'environmentalists' saint'') Bradley, for a comment!!
(Waz ole Jimmy gots ta do wid any o' dis??! Nuttin'... ya hear...now git...)
Amazing how green bolshevism enables sustainable power such as that from Niagara's hydro to be dumped in favour of expensive legislated greenie power. But, hey: Liberals such as Jim Bradley and George Smitherman had nothing to do with any of this - right!!! ha ha ha Why bother Jimmy with these niggling details about Niagara's water capacity being dumped for windy green bolshevism?!
And what's with this about the Great Lakes freezing?
Jim Bradley's green bolsheviks have been fear-mongering FOR YEARS that the PLANET IS MELTING!!! The  ice is melting!! Run!! The seas are going to flood!!
We were fear-mongered by Jim Bradley and Al Gore and Suzuki and the CBC and the St.Catharines Standard that unless we succumb to  Liberal Greenshevism, the Great Lakes were actually going to flood!! The water is rising!! Run!!
And now, Brad Duguid, the Liberal slimeball, wants to talk about, um... SCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF?
These are the same Liberal liars who have been peddling the GreenFear boilerplate propaganda that global warming is ALL SETTLED!!! The "science" was "settled" they claimed!
So if the "science" on global warming is "settled" why do McGuinty's Liberal hacks now need to study the lake ice??! Why, Jim Bradley and his climate-change doomsayer Liberals (and Stephane Dion's and Ignatieff's loons as well) have been telling us that the water in the Great Lakes isn't going to freeze anymore - isn't that right?!  Unreal!  Talk about a "feed in": these Liberal GreenFear-mongers have been feeding us their green socialist garbage for years.
And doncha jus' luv da story in the St.Catharines Standard on Feb.15, 2011, outlining how water rates in Niagara are going to go up substantially because people have reduced consumption, to the point that providing the water has now become more expensive on a per unit basis!!
We were told by the greensheviks that saving the water would save the earth!! All this did was make water more expensive. The same will apply to electricity, as well as health-care.
see also here.
*