Showing posts with label Brian McMullan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brian McMullan. Show all posts

Thursday, October 25, 2012

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.
*

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

The NHS should be treated as a crime scene

Further to my previous post ...

...the Dec.20, 2011 St.Catharines Standard reported that a C.difficile patient had died Dec.18 at GNGH, the hospital in Niagara Falls, Ontario. Oh, and a Norovirus outbreak was declared in Niagara as well, at the Welland hospital.
The story by Brett Clarkson, of course, did not mention any comments or reaction from the two local Niagara Liberal health-care monopolists, Kim Craitor or Jim Bradley, whose government runs the infection-plagued Niagara health monopoly.
No mention was made of any comments from the LHIN; and of course, no mention was made of any comments from health minister Deb Matthews.
Funny how the big-mouth local monopolist mayors such as Brian McMullan and Jim Diodati weren't asked for their comments either.
There have been no demands from these mayors that a public inquiry be called into the C.diff horror which McGuinty's Liberals have subjected our population to. Diodati and McMullan are quiet as church mice when it comes to demanding answers from their Liberal MPP's about these scores of Niagara patient deaths. Better to still blame Harris, eh?!
So, let's just forget - as Niagara's monopolist-friendly status-quo-supporting press has done - about examining Dalton McGuinty's Liberal impact on Niagara's 2011 C.diff deaths due to his Liberal's secretive decision to hide from a public C.diff inquiry back in 2008!!
The NHS should be treated as a crime scene: why isn't it?
*

Monday, December 12, 2011

The tragedy is that McMullan - when he had the chance to - didn't call for a public C. diff inquiry in Niagara

Further to this earlier post...

Not that long ago - just back in June, 2011 - the St.Catharines Standard's Jeff Bolichowski had interviewed Brian McMullan about the then-current C. diff crisis in Niagara.

McMullan was being used as the Standard's stand-in proxy for local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, who, as we all by now know, had conveniently disappeared from the scene during Niagara's 2011 summer of C. diff death. (Bradley never once was the subject of any in-depth interviews by the shameful St.Catharines Standard, about the C. difficile crisis in Niagara - from at least May of 2011 to Dec. of 2011 - there was nothing!!)

The Standard reported at the time:

McMullan, meanwhile, said he wants to know why the outbreak happened and how to prevent it from happening again.
"I think we're all anxious about the situation," he said. "The fact that there's been any loss of life is tragic."

So - let's see: will the Standard's boss Wendy Metcalfe now assign Bolichowski to follow up with McMullan, to ask about how many "answers" he had actually received about how to 'prevent a C. diff outbreak from happening again'?

Because, well... another C. diff outbreak HAS  'happened again' in Niagara - and McMullan has come up with no answers at all.

Mayor McMullan was spewing empty rhetoric then; spewing a pointless political placebo - let's see what he says now. (probably nothing...)

McMullan DID NOT bother to immediately call for a public inquiry in the last C. diff outbreak, which killed over 30 Niagara patients; apparently it wasn't that important for McMullan to 'get the answers'!! All McMullan was interested in was to spew some rhetoric so as it would appear he gave a  whit about any of this.

Did McMullan ever bother to ask Jim Bradley about the C. diff deaths? We are "anxious" to find out!

Why isn't McMullan calling on Bradley, publicly demanding that an independent inquiry be called into this CONTINUING C. diff horror in Niagara?

McMullan called Niagara's C. diff deaths in Jim Bradley's health-monopoly "tragic".

What specifically is the 'tragedy' about these deaths? Did the patients bring death upon themselves, because of their own personal flaws? Is that what McMullan meant: that the patients had tragic flaws which led to their own downfall?!?! ...y'know... like, they got sick, and foolishly thought that they would be safe in a McGuinty-monopoly-run hospital? Or, that they foolishly thought that Jim Bradley's Liberal healthcare duplicity would never victimize them... ... ..? [...or was McMullan referring to the 'tragedy' that we re-elected Liberal liars once again?!]

This was no tragedy - it was negligence then, and it is still negligence again. The patients were Liberal monopoly victims - and we have been given no answers.

Why did a C. diff outbreak occur once again, especially after McMullan's bluster about 'getting all kinds of answers so this wouldn't happen again', the first time?!?

How did the NHS allow this to slip through again? Will the Standard be interviewing the LHIN about their role in allowing the C. diff outbreak to recur?

This is a crime being perpetrated in an unaccountable Liberal-monopoly-run health system, time and again; those in charge spew meaningless assurances but hide from and do not bother calling for an inquiry to examine these deaths, while the monopolist politicians who control the health system are protected from liability.
*

Sunday, December 11, 2011

When will McMullan publicly ask Liberal Jim Bradley to account for the latest Niagara C. difficile outbreak?

Further to my previous  post:
So: here are Mayor McFullofit and Liberal MPP Jim Bradley all smiley-faced on another staged photo-op, while 21 patients (so far...) have died of C. difficile infection in Bradley's local Niagara single-payer health monopoly.
We all remember - right? - how back in mid-June, an oh-so-concerned Mayor McFullofit was demanding answers and explanations for this C. difficile outbreak in Niagara.
So here we are, once again... now 21 Niagarans are dead... and we have Mayor McFullofit at another photo-op, again standing happily next to Jim Bradley - the Liberal cabinet member from Niagara, whose despotic government is responsible for enforcing Ontario's health-care monopoly - and so again, we ask: Hey there, Mayor McFullofit: has Jim Bradley answered your questions yet?!??
Or haven't you even bothered to ask?!!
What a pathetic game these politicians are playing.
*
By Dec.8, 2011 - ANOTHER C. difficile outbreak was declared in Niagara: unbelievable, but true.
So: when can we expect Mayor McFullofit to again make his phony demand for 'answers and explanations'?
A lot of good that did last time, eh?
Where are all these forthcoming answers, which mayor Brian McMullan was earnestly going to get?!?
Let's hear Brian McMullan tell us exactly what Jim Bradley had ever 'answered and explained' to him about the C. diff outbreak - about any of Ontario's C. diff outbreaks. [Hundreds of patients were killed of C. diff in Ontario in 2008 - and Bradley's Liberals hid from a public inquiry! McMullan didn't bother  to 'demand explanations and answers' from Bradley about that then, did he?]
So here we are, again - with another damn Niagara C. diff outbreak in Dec.2011, yet, Brian McMullan has NEVER PROVIDED St.Catharines residents with any answers to any of his supposed demands from the last time - just several months ago, this summer!!
*

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Liberal Environment Minister Jim Bradley's years of Kyoto-pushing waste

Further to my previous post...
...Michael Den Tandt wrote in "Of course, Canada ditched ramshackle, bloated Kyoto commitments", (Montreal Gazette, Nov.29, 2011):

"We didn't get it done," wailed Michael Ignatieff about Canada's lacklustre, ineffectual attempts to meet this country's Kyoto Protocol carbon emission targets, back when the Liberal government of Jean Chretien was serious about pretending it took climate change seriously.

Ignatieff was, of course, spot on: Ottawa's Kyoto commitments died on the operating table in the waning years of Chretien's third term, as the first of three Canadian prime ministers came to realize that implementing Kyoto faithfully would doom the oilpatch and Canada's economic future with it. None of Chretien's Kyoto plans had teeth.

Which raises the question: How can the Liberals continue to holler about Kyoto today, as though they were the treaty's greatest champions? After promising to adopt it, it was they themselves who kicked it to the curb.

In 2002-03, far more than now, a clear disavowal of Kyoto would have been politically disastrous in centrist Ontario and left-leaning Quebec. Who in his or her right mind could be seen to be against saving the planet?

So prime ministers Chretien and Paul Martin in turn adopted the same clever, disingenuous policy: Pay careful lip service to the religion of global warming (because to do otherwise incites the theological fury of the true believers) but move sure-footedly to ensure that neither Canadian industry nor consumers pay a measurable price, for which you'd be blamed later at the polls. It worked not too badly, until sponsorship came along.

In 2006, Stephen Harper inherited Chretien's strategy and refined it. The Harper government in all but name withdrew from Kyoto on Day One. Conservatives have continued to gamely insist they believe enthusiastically in the battle against climate change — because that's what the strategy requires. Unlike the Liberals, though, they never bothered to even try to persuade us they would slash Canada's GHG emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels by 2012, as Kyoto requires.

Here's what both Liberals and Tories would say about climate change, if they were being honest.

The Kyoto Protocol has not mattered globally since 2001, when President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew for the United States. Even before then, this ramshackle, bloated attempt at global engineering was dead on arrival because of the non-participation of China, India and Brazil, among other huge and fast-growing economies.

Why did Kyoto sacrifice never really take off in Canada? It's not complicated: We have a conflict of interest. According to Statistics Canada, households directly or indirectly contribute about half the country's emissions. We do that by driving cars and heating homes, and by consuming products or services created with the use of fossil fuels.

As both home insulation and cars become more energy efficient, you'd think, emissions must fall. And they do. But economic growth acts as a counter. Between 1990 and 2004, for example, the intensity of Canadian household greenhouse gas emissions decreased by more than 20 per cent. But a 25-per-cent increase in household spending over the same period offset any GHG reductions.

In other words: where there are jobs there are emissions, in equal measure. The only surefire way of slashing emissions across an entire economy is to have a deep and lasting economic collapse, as happened to the former Soviet Union after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Former Liberal leader Stephane Dion's Green Shift, which he rode into a wall in 2008, was a sincere but politically naive attempt to de-carbonize the Canadian economy by applying monetary levers to the habits of ordinary Canadians. It was offered as a given that said transformation was a necessary and good thing. Dion's plan went supernova because he asked that Canadians accept a lower standard of living — in the form of higher real prices for energy — in exchange for his vision.

But now even that old discussion is being superseded. The skeptical science, for years confined to the scruffy margins by the International Panel on Climate Change and its supporters, took a huge leap forward earlier this year with the discovery by no less than the CERN laboratories, based in Switzerland — arguably the most prestigious scientific group in the world — that fluctuations in the sun's magnetic field have a very large, perhaps dominant effect on the earth's climate.

If further study bears this out, then policymakers will soon be left with the rather stunning conclusion that all of it — Kyoto, Copenhagen, Durban — has mainly been a waste. Even as that work begins, the CERN findings are steadily trickling through the blogosphere, quietly altering the political discussion everywhere — including in Canada, beyond Ottawa."
*
Finally, Den Tandt mentions Chretien's Liberal climate duplicity. About time.

It's funny, eh, how the St.Catharines Standard, just before Durban,  happens to... umm...  suddenly lose all contact [!] with their local Liberal MPP, Jim 'Save-The-Planet' Bradley, who back in 2002 was one of Dalton McGuinty's chief  Kyoto agitators in Ontario! (...and the Standard, of course, was one of Bradley's chief  Liberal-policy trumpeters, doing their best to keep the Save-The-Planet Greenshevism alive).

Funny how there are no interviews today in the Standard with Bradley's like-minded federal colleague, former local Liberal MP Walt Lastewka, about the failure-from-day-one of his Liberal's climate charade.

Funny how there are NO interviews in the St.Catharines Standard with Good Ole Jimmy about his years of deceptive GreenFear-pushing Climate Doomsday Statism!

Funny that in the last... what... twenty years, at least... the Standard has never really bothered to examine their own local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's GreenFear motivations and policies - even after dedicating a laughable token 'GreenTeam' at the height of the Al Gore-a-Palooza craze and Stephane Bumbledore Dion's shifty green Carnival of Climate Crapola.

Funny how the BradleyBootlickers in Niagara's press now can't find Bradley for his response to the slow, sad realization that his Liberal policies were an utter "waste".

Funny, how the St.Catharines Standard never carried a story examining Jim Bradley's man-made AGW global-warming "evidence", and his years of GreenFear agitation, even in context of the steady ClimateGate revelations! It's as if Ole Jimmy had never been involved in spreading GreenFear, ever!

Funny how the local press can't find responses from local Greenie-pushers like St.Catharines mayor Brian McFullofit, as well as many of Niagara Region's GreenFear political practitioner-opportunists, who fell for and merrily propagated Al Gore's and Dion's and Bradley's GreenFear baseless bullsh!t.

What a waste, indeed.
*

Sunday, October 23, 2011

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.
*

Saturday, July 16, 2011

The filthy health care hospital pit known as the Liberal Jim Bradley Wing

Here is C.J. Duffy's shocking July 13, 2011 letter in Niagara This Week:

Has C.J. Duffy contacted St.Catharines Liberal MPP Jim Bradley about this filthy health-care pit?

Jimmy and Deb Matthews are in charge of Ontario's health care system - where is secretive Liberal Jim Bradley's response to this letter? This occurred in Bradley's own St. Catharines riding! Why is Jim Bradley utterly mute on this issue? (I'm sure - hardee-har-har - that Mike Williscraft is sending a NTW reporter to Bradley's office asap!) Bradley hasn't bothered to publicly respond to this letter either!

Oh, yeah.... and why isn't St.Catharines mayor, the always-oh-so-so-soooo-concerned Brian McMullan 'demanding answers' to this single-payer health-care travesty in his city?! Why isn't Mayor McFullofit demanding that his monopolist buddy Jim Bradley publicly address Mr. Duffy's concerns?? (yeah: as if...)

Until June 20, 2008, George Smitherman was McGuinty's monopolist health minister, after that date in 2008, it was David Caplan - have either of these two Grits replied to Duffy's concerns; has Duffy contacted either of them about his dismal, frightening experiences at the St.Catharines NHS franchise of McGuinty's Liberal health-monopoly?

The NHS only mops on Friday - yet, Jim Bradley only answers questions what - once a FLICKING year??? There's no water to wash your hands - yet Jim Bradley and Dalton McGuinty have washed their hands of any complicity for the Mess in the NHS!!

McGuinty's disgusting Liberal health-monopoly-pushing despots need to be punished for the disaster they have foisted onto Ontario's patients.
*

Saturday, July 9, 2011

Still waiting for your C.difficile answers, Mayor McMullan

So: here are Mayor McFullofit and Liberal MPP Jim Bradley all smiley-faced on another staged photo-op, while 21 patients (so far...) have died of C. difficile infection in Bradley's local Niagara single-payer health monopoly.
We all remember - right? - how back in mid-June, an  oh-so-concerned  Mayor McFullofit was demanding answers and explanations for this C. difficile outbreak in Niagara.
So here we are, once again... now 21 Niagarans are dead... and we have Mayor McFullofit at another photo-op, again standing happily next to Jim Bradley - the Liberal cabinet member from Niagara, whose despotic government is responsible for enforcing Ontario's health-care monopoly - and so again, we ask: Hey there, Mayor McFullofit: has Jim Bradley answered your questions yet?!??
Or haven't you even bothered to ask?!!
What a pathetic game these politicians are playing.
*
By Dec.8, 2011 - ANOTHER C. difficile outbreak was declared in Niagara: unbelievable, but true. So when can we expect Mayor McFullofit  to again make his phony demands for 'answers and explanantions'?
A lot of good that did last time, eh?
Let's hear Brian McMullan tell us exactly what Jim Bradley had ever 'answered and explained' to him  about the C. diff outbreak - about any of the C. diff outbreaks. [Hundreds of patients were killed of C. diff in Ontario in 2008 - while Bradley's Liberals hid from a public inquiry! McMullan didn't bother to 'demand explanations and answers' from Bradley about that then, did he?]
So here we are, again - with another damn Niagara C. diff outbreak in Dec.2011, yet, Brian McMullan has NEVER PROVIDED St.Catharines residents with all these supposed answers which his grand 'demands' yielded from the last time - just this summer.
*

Sunday, June 19, 2011

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.  

Saturday, June 18, 2011

A cute photo-op with Liberal Jim Bradley - yet the Cone of Silence remains intact

Amazing - that bag of Liberal crap from St.Catharines, MPP Jim Bradley, appeared twice in local media photo-ops recently...

 - in the Jun.18 St.Catharines Standard, with St.Catharines Mayor Brian McMullan and Conservative MP Rick Dykstra, opening Kiwanis Field in St.Catharines

- and in the Jun.17 Niagara This Week, with Lincoln Mayor Bill Hodgson and Conservative MP Dean Allison, opening the Hilary Bald splash pad in Beamsville, where Bradley's seen performing his umbrella-ella parody of Mary Poppins  (... by the way, since when has Jim Bradley become the MPP for Beamsville...?!)

... and yet, did anybody bother to ask that Liberal sack of shit Jim Bradley about the C. difficile outbreak in St.Catharines?!
How about it, Rick and Dean and Brian and Billy: did any of you ask your smiley photo-op buddy Bradley anything at all about why this killer outbreak occurred in St.Catharines, under Jim Bradley's monopolist watch?!
Did any reporter ask Bradley about that? Hey, Bernie Puchalski of the St.Catharines Standard, or Scott Rosts from NTW: did you bother to question the secretive Liberal Jim Bradley about the C. diff outbreak in St.Catharines??l Or were you simply acting as McGuinty's useful-idiot stenographers??
Oh, gee, gosh darnit... this isn't the time or place for seriousness, after all...
Only a week ago, a smarmy, sanctimonious Mayor McMullan was piously demanding 'answers and explanations' about the outbreak.
Hey, Mayor McFullofit: just yesterday you were happily posing with your buddy Bradley, while patients were still struggling with the killer outbreak in your own city: WHY DIDN'T YOU ASK BRADLEY?!!?
Where are all those 'answers and explanations' which you were phonily seeking, Mr. McMullan?!
Bradley's Liberals underfunded the NHS for years - have you conveniently FORGOTTEN  that, Mayor McFullofit?
Why hasn't McMullan demanded that his ball-buddy Bradley make a public statement about the C. diff outbreak and its causes?
Has McMullan demanded a public inquiry into this outbreak?!
Has McMullan demanded an independent investigation into the link between the Liberal cabinet, the Smitherman-era-Liberal-created LHIN's, the historical Liberal health-care underfunding to the NHS, and the consequent effect on patients, trapped within the confines of a no-patient-choice, state-controlled, single-payer health-monopoly?
No, Mayor McFullofit hasn't, the FLICKING hypocrite.
He just wants shallow, safe, phony, facile 'answers', all status-quo, don't-rock-the-boat mumbo-jumbo appearance over substance.
Have any of the other politicians rubbing elbows with Bradley bothered to demand answers and call for a public inquiry, an investigation which cannot be tainted or influenced by Liberal apparatchiks?
Nope - all were smiley-faced and la-di-da happy, kicking balls around with Bradley, while health-care monopolist Jim Bradley and his secretive Liberals were kicking patient-victims in the balls.
Shame on your 'political-correctness', Brian McMullan, Dean Allison, Bill Hodgson, and Rick Dykstra: shame on you, for sloughing off the interests of Ontario's patients, who are trapped and victimized in Jim Bradley's secretive, ideological state-run health-care monopoly, right in Niagara.
We expected more from these politicians; they are now all part of the status-quo problem.
Looks like no-one's going to bother holding Jim Bradley, McGuinty's senior Liberal thug in Niagara, accountable.
*

Saturday, June 11, 2011

Another Niagara health-care horror; St.Catharines Standard portrays Mayor McMullan as missing-in-action Liberal Jim Bradley's proxy during C. difficile crisis

The St.Catharines Standard's Jeff Bolichowski wrote in "Don't send me there" (Jun.11,2011):

"The family of a woman who died during St. Catharines General Hospital's C. difficile outbreak said she dreaded being treated at the hospital she volunteered at for years.
Elizabeth Loucks, 87, of St. Catharines died at the hospital Thursday morning, said daughter Janet Melnyk. She said her mother was a C. difficile patient and believes she caught the superbug during an earlier admittance to the hospital in May.
As Loucks battled the symptoms of the illness, Melnyk said, her mother didn't want to go back to the hospital despite having mended clothes as a volunteer there until about two years ago.
"She didn't want to go," she said. "That was her exact words: 'Don't send me there. I'll just get sicker.' "
Melnyk said despite her mom's death, she was pleased with doctors' efforts to save her. She said the hospital's staff were determined to beat Loucks' C. difficile.
But she slammed the hospital's "filthy" conditions. "The conditions in there are disgusting," she said, describing cluttered halls crammed with lab coats.
Melnyk, of Hamilton, said the feisty Loucks had gone to Guelph for a hip replacement in April and rebounded nicely. But after coming down with a bladder illness, she went for treatment in May to St. Catharines General.
When she returned home, the symptoms started. The timing has Melnyk convinced her mother picked up the disease in St. Catharines.
Though Loucks was not named in a Niagara Health System media release as the fourth C. difficile patient to die at the hospital, Melnyk believes she's the one because the release was sent out hours after her death on Thursday.
The release said the death was reported to the regional coroner's office. The NHS will conduct its own review to determine if C. difficile was the cause of death.
Loucks leaves behind two children and six grandchildren.
NHS vice-president Anne Atkinson would not confirm if Loucks was the victim or discuss her case.
"I have to respect patient confidentiality," she said.
But she said public health officials toured the hospital Monday and Tuesday and were pleased with its cleanliness.
She said sometimes bags are left out before laundry pickup, which can make the building look worse than it is. And while doctors may leave coats in the corridors when they put on protective gear, it doesn't happen often.
Mayor Brian McMullan said he had no concerns about the hospital's sanitation and has been assured it's clean. But he acknowledged the building is aging.
"It's a facility... well past its prime and its useful life," he said.
"I think everyone will be glad, especially patients, when they will be in a brand new state-of-the-art facility."
Dr. Jessica Hopkins of the Niagara public health department also wouldn't comment on specific C. difficile cases. But she said in some situations, C. difficile symptoms — which include constant diarrhea — don't show up for up to eight weeks after someone is exposed.
As of Friday afternoon, Atkinson said the hospital has 22 people with C. difficile, bringing the total to 29 patients over the course of the outbreak. But only two have been infected since safeguards were put in place, and even those caught it early on.
The hospital's protective measures include isolating patients in special areas, cleaning surfaces twice a day with a spore-killing agent and having staff who work with infected patients not work with uninfected people and vice-versa.
The outbreak isn't over yet, Hopkins said.
"There isn't a specific time period that you can say it's going to last," Hopkins said.
"Most outbreaks usually last a couple of months in time."
She said she couldn't guess if more people would die or estimate how many.
"It's not predictable," she said "It's based a lot on a person's underlying health condition and how they respond to treatment."
Hopkins said the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is aware of the outbreak. The Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion has been providing advice on bringing it under control.
But while she said the safeguards had provided positive signs the spread is being controlled, it's not over.
"We need to wait until rates of C. difficile return to baseline levels," she said. "It's going to take many weeks for that to happen."
McMullan, meanwhile, said he wants to know why the outbreak happened and how to prevent it from happening again.
"I think we're all anxious about the situation," he said. "The fact that there's been any loss of life is tragic."
*
It is utterly unbelievable - truly unfathomable - that the St.Catharines Standard FAILED YET AGAIN - for 14 STRAIGHT DAYS, since May 28 - to report what local Liberal MPP and single-payer health-care monopolist Jim Bradley has to say about this!!
Who the f*ck cares what Mayor Brian McFullofit has got to say?
What, has Mayor McMullan now somehow become Jim Bradley's goddam proxy?! Has Mayor McFullofit suddenly been appointed through some murky Liberal Order-In-Council as a phony 'deputy-MPP for St. Catharines'!?
WHERE IS THAT LIBERAL SCUMBAG JIM BRADLEY?
Why is the St. Catharines Standard protecting Jim Bradley?
Why isn't the Standard even telling readers whether or not the paper had contacted the Savant of Secord Dr., and whether or not Bradley responded?
Now we're being told about how Mayor McFullofit - who has no provincial health-care authority - 'wants answers' and 'wants to prevent' this from happening... bla bla bla... what crocodile-tear contrition!
For Pete's sake, Mr. McMullan:
McGuinty's Liberals refused to call an inquiry when their health-monopoly killed 500 Ontario patients in 2008!!! That was 3 years ago!
Have you ever asked your secretive Liberal buddy Jim Bradley about that, Mr. McMullan??
Why would McMullan expect any Liberal - such as Jim Bradley - to give a rat's ass about a handful of his health-monopoly victims in St. Catharines? After all, the Liberals tell us that these victims are just anomalies...
Mr. McMullan, you were with Bradley (just several days ago, on Jun 10, 2011, as reported in Niagara this Week) for cryin' out loud, blowing millions of dollars on bus garages - why the f*ck didn't ya ask yer buddy Bradley about his killer C. difficile outbreak then??
Smitherman, Bradley, Craitor and the rest of Dalton McGuinty's scumbag Liberals covered up the earlier 2008 C. difficile outbreak with facile assurances {which clearly were lies} that all was taken care of.
We were just supposed to trust sleazy Smitherman on that, remember, with NO PUBLIC INQUIRY ever being called.
I don't remember big-mouth McMullan or Jim Bradley ever 'demanding explanations' from ANY Liberal scumbag for those C. difficile patient deaths back then, in 2008!!
I don't recall McMullan - now apparently the St.Catharines Standard's new Jim Bradley go-to clone - ever demanding that McGuinty's Liberals give him 'answers'; or demanding that the Liberals call a public inquiry into those 2008 C. difficile deaths!!
Mayor McFullofit didn't give a shit then.
So if McMullan was serious now - and not just mouthing McFullofit rhetoric - he would have already called for a public inquiry this time. That would get some answers. But, no such luck.
If McMullan was serious, he would have already publicly demanded that Jim Bradley's Liberals launch a public inquiry.
McMullan would be outraged and would have demanded publicly for Bradley to show himself and to explain his government's actions.
But we didn't see that.
We just saw hot air spewing from McFullofit, who has no responsibility for running the provincial health-system; and we saw NOTHING from Liberal MPP Jim Bradley - whose government is responsible for running the health system.
Jim Bradley has utterly abdicated his role as MPP on this most serious issue, which unfolded right under his secretive nose, right in his own city.
And mayor McFullofit's bleating lamentation about this being oh-so-tragic is thoroughly phony: seeing that the secretive Liberals in charge of the health-system couldn't be bothered to hold a proper public inquiry last time - when hundreds of patients were killed - then this latest outbreak isn't "tragic", Mr. Mayor - it's NEGLIGENT - see here.
Go get your story straight with Jim Bradley - if you can find him.
*

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Let's examine Jim Bradley's graphic hockey-stick enviro-fantasy

A rare 'climate-change'-related story appeared in the St.Catharines Standard which didn't resonate with the usual leftist greenshevism of the global warming fear-mongerers.
But, don't get your hopes up - no reporter from the St.Catharines Standard has yet bothered to ask for Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's views on the latest climate scam revelation.
This has nothin' to do with Jimmy, y'see... it's not as if Jim Bradley ever promoted doomsday global-warming GreenFearTM !! (heh heh)
Bradley surely would prefer that guys like Ross McKitrick didn't keep coming up with things that questioned the greenshevist climate deceptions of politicians such as Jim, as in McKitrick's column "Defects in key climate data uncovered" (National Post, Oct.1, 2009)
Oddly, we didn't hear much about McKitrick and his "climate-change" revelations in the St.Catharines Standard back then. I mean, really, why question Jim Bradley's graphic hockey-stick enviro-fantasy?!
We still don't see anything in the Standard looking into the World Wildlife Fund's co-opting of the McMullan council with their 'earth day' propaganda... It's best to, you know, not talk about it... after all: RAH RAH RAH Copenhagen, doncha know...!
But now, the St.Catharines Standard's editors could have at least tried to correct Ross McKitrick's name in Brian Lilley's Sun Media story, which was mis-spelled as "McKintrick".
[Maybe the green teamster cheerleaders over at the Jim Bradley Fan Club were going 'Ross mcwho? We dunno anything 'bout him... who is this guy? We, like, all know, like, about Al Gore, eh, and the melting, like, um, glaciers and stuff... and like... umm, oh yeah, the flooding and stuff, and ah, oh yeah... the drowning polar bears and stuff... and like we know about David Suzuki , and about Jim Bradley and Kyoto... but like, we've never heard of this Mcsomething guy...']

Brian Lilley reported in "Climate change science under fire - again" (St.Catharines Standard, July 13, 2010):

"The scientific accuracy of the United Nations' climate change reports are coming under fire again.

In a scandal that dates back to January and was dubbed Amazongate at the time, it has been confirmed that claims of the Amazon burning up due to climate change were sexed-up and pulled from activist literature.

The 2007 UN report on climate change, the one that has helped guide government efforts to spend billions of dollars to combat global warming, claimed that “Up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation.”


The real report, drawn from a website and paid for by pressure group the World Wildlife Fund, says something quite different.

While the UN reports are often described as scientific and peer-reviewed, this claim of the Amazon being at high risk originated on a website of a Brazilian advocacy group. The original claim read that “Probably 30 to 40% of the forests of the Brazilian Amazon are sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall."

The World Wildlife Fund says it cannot be held responsible for how the UN climate change group used its data.

So far no one seems to be able to say how a report that claimed parts of the Brazilian rainforest “probably” are “sensitive” was hyped to make things sound more dire.

Professor Ross McKintrick says no one should be surprised that such mistakes end up in these massive reports.

“The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) doesn’t have the internal rigour that one would expect of it,” said McKintrick [sic] from his office at the University of Guelph. “Nothing is in the process to prevent activist rhetoric from appearing.” McKintrick, who teaches environmental economics and has had his own battles with the accuracy of climate change reports, says the calculations used in the UN reports are often not checked for accuracy and even the much-vaunted peer-review process does not guarantee that the information used is correct.

Amazongate is not the only claim that relies on information from activist groups.

Toronto author Donna Lafamboise recently led a team of citizen auditors through the 2007 climate change report and found heavy use of reports from Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund. That report is published at noconsensus.org.

Laframboise says Greenpeace was cited at least eight times and the WWF at least nine times, despite both groups having clearly stated activist goals when it comes to climate change.

“This is shocking in a report that the public has been told relies solely on peer-reviewed research published in scientific journals,” said Laframboise.

The UN has appointed a team of academic experts to give advice on how to avoid these mistakes in the future, but McKintrick says the UN isn’t really serious about changing anything.

He points out that the authors for the next massive climate change report have already been chosen and many were part of the last error-riddled effort.

Work has also already begun on the follow-up to Copenhagen; climate experts will try to hash out a new climate deal in Cancun, Mexico, in November."


Activist climate-change/global-warming literature and rhetoric?! What about the activist rhetoric, the greenshevism, which was FEAR-MONGERED INTO POLICY  by statist politicians and Liberal liars such as Dalton McGuinty and Jim Bradley?

Who's looking into that?
*

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Bradley steals from health system to fund performance centre

It's a wonder Marlene Bergsma didn't gag when writing "Arts funding forces lyricist to rewrite song" (see http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2594345)

Jo Henderson should've been rewriting the lyrics to the dirge of the Volga Boatmen instead, emphasizing the long struggle taxpayers will have before this wasted arts centre money gets repaid. What a shameless display of ass-kissing this Gilbert and Sullivan travesty-tripe was! All the "proper" members of Niagara's elite upper crust were given homage.

Good gosh golly darn - lookee there, folks: Good Ole Jimmy Bradley just appeared outta nowhere and pulled 26 million (of our) dollars out of his pants pocket: Are ya happy to see me and my big wad of dough?? Well, we sure are, Jimmy!! Now how 'bout a song, and a dance, to boot!!

Let's write a little ditty about Jim's deceptive Liberal libretto - how several months ago Jim, the deft dirty dancer, was solemnly lecturing us on the 'limitations' of Ontario's budget - in other words, the healthcare monopoly (which Jim's Liberal thugs run) can forget about having its deficit cleared!!

Yep - we see Jim Bradley's priorities - and Job #1 for Jim Bradley is buying himself another re-election. Jim Bradley "found" some $26 million for an unnecessary public arts centre, but couldn't find any money for his LHIN-constricted NHS. (the same NHS, btw, which previous health minister wanker Smitherman had accused - without specific evidence - of 'spending like drunken sailors').

Healthcare isn't Bradley's over-riding concern - and neither is Bradley willing to allow the ombudsman to investigate the MUSH sector, where all this arts centre crap began. It's interesting to see how a university can get a municipal council to become its proxy/front-man/partner in order to expropriate private property. Hey - no one gives a shit about that - certainly not Bradley, nor anti-port-tower mayor McFullofshit. Strangely, Jim Bradley and his Liberal government have made sure that no one can investigate whether Liberal vote-buying in the MUSH sector has led to government 'spending like drunken sailors' (eHealth anyone? Thanks, Smitherman)

Essentially, Jim Bradley stole $26 million from his health care monopoly to buy himself some votes with the arts centre... it's just another day at the office for Jim.