After suffering weeks of that hideously overused standard template (which essentially flags the blogger as being a complete neophyte), Cynics Unlimited now has a new template … or at least a slight variation on the stylish Wuhan theme. Regards to Michelle for the custom header. This theme will be tweaked slightly over the coming months, but for the most part the layout is adequate to our needs. Now only “1000″ other people’s sites look like ours, as opposed to “1000000000000000″! 
Archive for January, 2006
13
Jan
New Site Theme
The second English debate for the 2006 Election has completed done and it … simply failed to impress. Granted, only the second half of this debate was witnessed with my full attention, but based on the finale there were no major explosions. Impressions of each of the leaders follow:
Paul Martin
Mr. Martin seriously dropped the ball in this debate. Indeed he started off on the offensive, going as far as to request Harper’s allegiance in banning notwithstanding clause (this would severely impair Harper’s ability to sidestep the courts and overturn court rulings permitting gay marriage). However, Martin quickly went on the defensive as he took pot shots from all sides over every scandal and gaffe on his resume. Looking visibly agitated, he took nearly every bit of bait offered by each party leader – at his lowest point, Martin answered an unrelated question with a rant about the Gomery trial, repeating emphatically how he was cleared. Martin had little success in trying to rattle the Conservative leader by discussing Harper’s earlier statements about Canada being a Northern European welfare state, which appeared to be his silver bullet.
Stephen Harper
Showing definite signs of political maturity, Harper played the conciliatory dove. On several occasions he offered the political olive branch to Jack Layton, anticipating that a Conservative victory will indeed be a minority (obviously someone gave his head a shake after that silly muse about a majority). Layton’s rebuke was taken in stride, as Harper casually offered his partnership once the debates were over. Policy questions were answered with an unusually moderate tone, and Harper even returned to one of his more bizarre overtures – recognition that Quebecers were a “nationâ€. Ms.Cynapse (being a typical woman) noted only two things about Harper:
- His nice blue tie
- The fact that he was the only politician who genuinely smiled when he talked
Being a typical male, Cynapse said “So what?â€. But the truth is … women notice this sort of thing and it could make a difference for a leader with a largely male following.
Jack Layton
Layton closed the debate with a very nice slogan. It’s a shame he used the same slogan-tone throughout the whole debate - nearly every response sounded like his final summation. Layton’s modus operandi was similar to that of the first English debate: repeatedly accuse Harper of wanting to turn Canada into America; trip up Martin with anecdotes that illustrate the apparent ineptness of his party and try to defuse Duceppe by directly challenging the notion that Quebecers’ best deal in terms of services actually lies in sovereignty. The latter strategy was the most interesting, as Duceppe never had a definitive comeback. It is doubtful Layton won or lost voters with his repetitive tactics; however his role as kingmaker in the next parliament seems all but assured, as evidenced by the fact that Harper and Martin both went out of their way not to demonize him.
Gilles Duceppe
With nothing to lose, Duceppe went out with all guns blazing against … everyone and anyone. Despite having only a moderate command of the English language, Duceppe once again showed more grace and style than his opponents. He chose his battles strategically, trying to position himself as being a real Quebecer opposed to Paul Martin. Duceppe did score a good point against the Conservatives, pointing out that Options Canada (under investigation for internal management practices) took flight under Mulroney. Since he was preaching to the choir, it almost didn’t matter what Duceppe did … and it showed.
Jim Harris
Harris was very silent … probably because he wasn’t there. Isn’t it about time the Green Party got some air time? Having gained 6% of the popular vote with minimal media coverage, the Greens can hardly be relegated to the same fringe as the Communist Party of Canada or the Christian Heritage Party. Indeed, the NDP could use some serious competition on their end of the political spectrum.
There was no definite winner, but Paul Martin certainly lost. Far too often, the Prime Minister was sidetracked by backhand comments that should have been anticipated. Had Martin played his cool, he could have regained some Ontarian and moderate support as the voice of comfortable familiarity. Instead, his short temper indicated fear, which in turn made it difficult to achieve his ultimate goal: making voters fear Stephen Harper.
Based on the outcome of this debate, it looks a lot like Canada is heading for a Conservative minority. Harper’s party went into the debate with a 9% lead in the polls and that is likely to increase following once Canadians digest the results of the debate. Even the traditional last-minute correction in favor of the Liberals may not overcome such a strong lead.
Finally, CBC should seriously consider changing the debate format to allow more direct dialog between the leaders. It’s one thing to hear the same old reiteration of the party platform; defending that platform against scrutiny reveals much more useful information about each leader’s conviction and forethought.
Quotes:
“I don’t believe that Canada was built on American conservative values. It was built on compassion, on generosity, on sharing and understanding.â€
-Paul Martin
“My forefathers have lived under the flag of this country for six generations. I have friends and relatives across this country and I have children growing up under the flag of this country, and my business, our family business, always operated flying the flag of this country. What I say to Mr. Martin is the values of ordinary Canadians are honesty, hard work, integrity and accountability, and your government, Mr. Martin, has not represented those values in parliament.â€
-Stephen Harper
“I ask you to join me in saying enough is enough to Liberal arrogance and scandals, and enough to the vote-buying promises of the Conservativesâ€
-Jack Layton
“We are different. Everyone in Quebec knows that Quebec is quite different from the rest of Canada. Not better, not worse. Plain differentâ€
-Gilles Duceppe
“I’m a Quebecer and simply don’t tell me that my values are different. My values are the same values as somebody who lives in Nova Scotia, Ontario or western Canada. The fact is that Quebecers have this same feeling. They want to build a great countryâ€
-Paul Martin
“He was dividing God’s land, and I would say, ‘Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America … God says, ‘This land belongs to me, and you’d better leave it alone’â€
-Pat Robertson (2006), suggesting God caused Israeli PM Ariel Sharon to have a stroke, as retribution for entering negotiations with the Palestinians
Aside from challenging Jerry Falwell for the title of Christian court jester, Pat Robertson has contributed precious little to the American religious or political landscape as of late. Starting his career in the 1950’s, Robertson quickly became an A-list star on the Christian scene. Robertson’s success was attributed in part to a keen ability to tap into the fears of Christian conservatives, threatened by an ever-secularizing government and media. Equally important was Pat’s business savvy - his primary achievements include the internationally-viewed CBN Cable Network (later sold to Fox and eventually Disney), the formation of what would become Regent University, the ACLJ (fashioned as an anti-ACLU, focused on dissolving the separation between church and state) and most notably the Christian Coalition. Robertson also raised considerable revenue by delineating his conservative Christian views in various books and on his talk show, The 700 Club.
In fact, Pat Robertson’s adherence to Christian principles often took a backseat to his financial endeavors. In order to secure his business assets in China, Robertson defended China’s abortion-driven One Child policy as a practical solution to avoid overpopulation. Praise for his Rwandan refugee effort “Operation Blessing†soon turned to scorn when it was discovered the non-profit outfit was being used to transport diamond mining equipment for a joint business venture between Robertson and African dictator Mobutu Sese Seko. In what was perhaps his boldest move, Robertson publicly backed Liberian dictator Charles Taylor, who committed numerous human rights atrocities before being forced into exile. Robertson’s defense was most likely a bid to secure his multimillion dollar investment in Liberian gold mines.
As if this weren’t enough, the fiery 700 Club minister turned heads over the past 20 years with a seemingly endless flurry of bizarre and extremist rhetoric that even staunchly conservative Christians were unable to defend:
“I think George Bush is going to win in a walk. I really believe that I’m hearing from the Lord it’s going to be like a blowout election of 2004. It’s shaping up that way. The Lord has just blessed him…. I mean, he could make terrible mistakes and comes out of it. It doesn’t make any difference what he does, good or bad. God picks him up because he’s a man of prayer and God’s blessing him.â€
-Pat Robertson (2004) explaining why the Christian George Bush would win the election and Christian Al Gore would not … by a landslide no less
“I think ‘one man, one vote’ just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights.â€
-Pat Robertson (1992) on why post-apartheid South Africa should not embrace democracy
“It is interesting, that termites don’t build things, and the great builders of our nation almost to a man have been Christians, because Christians have the desire to build something. He is motivated by love of man and God, so he builds. The people who have come into institutions are primarily termites. They are into destroying institutions that have been built by Christians, whether it is universities, governments, our own traditions, that we have…. The termites are in charge now, and that is not the way it ought to be, and the time has arrived for a godly fumigation.â€
-Pat Robertson (1986) declaring destruction to all non-believers
“Many of those people involved with Adolph Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals — the two things seem to go together.â€
-Pat Robertson (1993) apparently implying Hitler and the original Nazi Party were in power after 1966, when the church of Satan was initially formed
“To see Americans become followers of Islam is nothing short of insanity…. The Islamic people, the Arabs, were the ones who captured Africans, put them in slavery, and sent them to America as slaves. Why would the people in America want to embrace the religion of slaversâ€
-Pat Robertson (1997) declaring that Americans had no problem receiving slaves … just the religion of the merchants since their slave values is immoral [ignoring historical revision for now]
“Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It’s no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.â€
-Pat Robertson (1993) explaining why media opposition to his values is worse than slavery and comparable to the holocaust
“The founding document of the United States of America acknowledges the Lordship of Jesus Christ because we are a Christian nation.â€
-Pat Robertson displaying his commanding authority on the American Constitution
“Feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbiansâ€
-Pat Robertson … ???
Understandably, Pat Robertson’s political stock has dropped somewhat over the past decade. Prior to the Sharon statement, he was in the headlines for declaring that the U.S. should assassinate Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez. The Evangelical-friendly Bush regime quickly distanced themselves from Robertson’s statements. For voting against the teaching of Intelligent Design in schools, Pat warned of impending doom for the city of Dover, Pennsylvania (keep in mind Intelligent Design is apparently not supposed to be religious).
But without knowing Robertson’s past, one can still only ponder what hopeless amalgamation of anecdotes and superstitions substitute for “logic†in his mind. If God wants to punish Sharon, why didn’t God kill him outright? Having survived a stroke severe enough to kill the average person, Israel’s most popular politician may become a saint and further embolden Israelis to pursue a lasting peace with the Palestinians. Furthermore, why didn’t God reward Benjamin Netanyahu (who went from Prime Minister to a being a guest lecturer on the North American pro-Israeli lecture circuit) for taking a relentlessly hard line? For that matter, why isn’t God rewarding Pat Robertson for his frequent condemnations of … the planet earth? Perhaps there is no logic in asking logical questions about Pat Robertson – it may be best to just enjoy him.
Some good news and some bad news … The good news is that, despite being online for less than a week, people are reading Cynics Unlimited. This is evidenced by a Toronto Sun quotation taken from The Jane Creba Factor while reporting on bloggers venting their grief. The bad news is that the quotation in question (”one has to wonder whether we’d all be falling over ourselves to demand government action had Jane been another Mohamed or Shaquan”) was attributed to Jack’s News Watch. Fortunately, Jack is a standup guy and searched for the actual origin of the quote to redirect inquisitive Sun readers. Much respect is due.
Speaking of Jane Creba, Jack’s website links to a Globe and Mail editorial by Margaret Wente. This truthful-though-not-quite-complete summary of the causes behind gun violence are indicative of the epic battle brewing between two groups of thinkers:
- Those who think racism/exclusion and little else contribute to the current state of the predominantly black-on-black warfare taking place in Toronto (largely socialist and/or black types)
- Those who think black culture and little else contribute to the current state of the predominantly black-on-black warfare taking place in Toronto (largely conservative and/or white types)
Of course, our trifecta of government incompetence has aggravated the situation by staging a hasty conference on how to combat gun crime … without the attendance of any actual leaders (Mayor, Premier and Prime Minister respectively) or an invitation to the black community groups who have been campaiging for months to create such a conference. Predictably, the black community groups held a press conference to vent to an all-too-eager media, which will in turn sell a lot of papers by furthering tensions. How can it not be inferred that the government is STILL not legitimately interested in bringing peace to Toronto? By catalyzing a conflict between two groups of law-abiding Canadians citizens with 99% similar objectives they’ve achieved exactly the opposite.
Toronto Sun Article Featuring Cynics Unlimited Quote (PDF)
After years of defeat, disappointment and disastrous political strategies, things finally seem to be going Stephen Harper’s way.
Recently published polls indicate that if an election were held today, Harper’s Conservative Party could win a minority government with 33% of the popular vote. Harper’s gains in Ontario, which has remained elusive to post-Mulroney Conservative parties, were most significant with 38% of the popular vote vs. Paul Martin’s 36%. Harper’s often-maligned image has also made gains, with 36% of survey respondents saying their opinion of him has improved (28% said their view of Harper has worsened). Compare this to Paul Martin, whose image has suffered in a whopping 50% of respondent’s eyes.
Having learned from history, Stephen Harper is not ready to declare victory yet – the Conservative Party of Canada looked set to win a minority during the previous national election, until a last-minute surge by the Liberals relegated the Conservatives to opposition status once again. It is widely believed that the Ontarian fear of Harper’s socially-conservative “hidden agenda†led to a last minute switch back to the Liberals.
Does Stephen Harper need to fear another such defeat? The answer may depend on just how dissatisfied Ontarians are with the Liberal Party. While the initial round of scandals (including the much publicized Gomery / AdScam Inquiry) had only a marginal effect on the opinion of Canadians who didn’t already have a conservative-driven vendetta, more recent missteps have seriously shaken voter faith in the once-dominant Liberals:
- The recent Goodale scandal served to illustrate that the previous AdScam scandal was closer to Liberal routine than chance incident. The RCMP is currently investigating whether the department of Finance Minister Ralph Goodale leaked details of changes to the income trust tax policy to investors ahead of its official November 23rd release. Hours before the policy became law, stock trading soared unexpectedly for companies whose stocks were to benefit most from the policy changes
- The surge in gun crimes throughout the Greater Toronto Area highlighted the ineffectiveness of the $2 billion national gun registry. Only after the murder of Jane Creba –Toronto’s 52nd gun death of 2005- did Martin seriously address the loose enforcement of laws that directly contributed to several of the deaths
It would be easy to assume that the Liberals have merely ignored the mounting problems for too long and Canadians are fed-up with the seemingly monthly scandals/boondoggles. This is probably part of the answer, but one also has to consider the economic effect of these problems. Investor confidence in Bay Street will be severely shaken if the RCMP does find evidence of inside knowledge being passed to select investors from the government. Increasingly negative media coverage of Toronto gang-fueled violence is already affecting both business and tourism downtown.
These economic problems go to the heart of the Liberal election strategy of selling their economic record. While Canada has economically flourished over the past few years, the future remains uncertain. Aside from the aforementioned problems, Canada’s increasingly strained relations with its largest trading partner are adding further jitters to Canadians on Bay Street and beyond. Fluctuating prices of raw exports have factored heavily into Canada’s economic growth, and these fortunes could turn on any international policy or economic change. A weakened tourist and/or business sector could leave Canada extremely vulnerable, especially provinces like Ontario that rely less on the export of raw materials.
With this in mind, the federal election would once again appear to be Harper’s to lose, as Liberal inaction and corruption are easing Ontario’s traditional hostility toward the Conservative candidate. As long as Harper continues to press on sure victory issues (crime, fighting corruption, taxation) while avoiding Ontario-repellents (abortion, bible-bashing, healthcare privatization) he could easily become our next Prime Minister. Canada requires political change in order to remain economically and politically viable; thus many wait in hope that Stephen Harper doesn’t pull another defeat from the jaws of victory.
01
Jan
The Jane Creba Factor
Boxing Day 2005 marked an important turning point for Toronto’s “Year of the Gunâ€. A brazen mid-day shootout between up to 15 youths resulted in the death of 15 year old Jane Creba and injuries to 6 others (all but one have been confirmed unconnected to gang activity). Creba, like thousands of other Torontonians and out-of-towners, was out deal-shopping with her family when she wandered into the path of a bullet intended for one of the youth combatants.
The reaction to this senseless murder was instantaneous and unprecedented:
- Lucia Campisi, the first paramedic on the scene, spoke candidly in TV interviews about the trauma she suffered and the subsequent counseling she now receives after learning her efforts were not enough to save Creba’s life.
- A candlelight vigil for the victim quickly became a major political event, attracting hundreds of mourners (instead of the usual dozens of mourners who attended vigils for other victims), advocacy groups and a who’s who of politicians seeking (re)election in 2006
- A online guestbook was setup online for friends and family to send condolences to Creba, and instead was flooded with heartfelt condolences from as far away as Australia
- A online guestbook was setup online for friends and family to send condolences to Creba, and instead was flooded with heartfelt condolences from as far away as Australia
- News columnists across Canada predicted doom and gloom for Toronto. Toronto Sun writer Connie Woodcock, in a column titled ‘Farewell, Toronto’, declared never to return to the city for her commercial needs: “Next time I feel like going shopping, I’m not getting any closer to Yonge and Dundas than the Oshawa Mall. I’ve never heard of a shootout thereâ€
- The Toronto Youth Cabinet, a grassroots community group previously ignored by politicians and much of the media (despite their constant suggestions on how to combat gun violence) suddenly found themselves on national TV via CTV Newsnet
- Prior to this shooting, public interest in Toronto’s spiraling gun violence problem was lukewarm at best. Despite the efforts of the local media to draw attention to the escalating violence and the social problems behind this violence (best exemplified by CityTV’s Stop the Violence Web/TV campaign), the response of the average Canadian was “Let them shoot each otherâ€, “Liberals / Caribbean immigrants / Mike Harris / 50-Cent is to blame†or “I hate Toronto anywayâ€.
So why the sudden outpouring of grief and emotion from the far corners of the nation and beyond? First, look at what it is most likely NOT the cause of the sudden public interest:
- The uniqueness of a Toronto murder. Jane Creba was the 78th and final Toronto murder victim of 2005
- The existence of gun violence in Toronto. Creba was 52nd and final Toronto murder victim of 2005
- A shooting in a highly visible area. 21 year-old Dwayne Taylor was shot to death at Dundas Square (just blocks away from the Creba shooting) nearly half a year earlier. The venue was equally crowded, being in the midst of the annual Caribana festival, and police were present during the time of the shooting
- The innocence of the victim. 18 year-old Jason Huxtable –a recent high school graduate who planned to study Business at Seneca College- was gunned down by a 15 year old boy for the unspeakable crime of visiting a girl who happened to live in the wrong housing project. 26 year-old Livvette Olivea Miller was killed in a manner similar to Jane Creba – the mother of four was caught in the crossfire between rival gang members at a crowded North York dance club
- Media coverage. As stated, local coverage of gun violence has been comprehensive. Apart from CityTV’s campaign, the Toronto Star and Toronto Sun have also run specials on gun violence and the social conditions behind them. Each shooting, and the profile of the victim(s) involved, has been well publicized
So if all of these factors could have logically been the cause, what’s left? The obvious thing no one wants to admit: Jane Creba is a 15 year old all-Canadian white girl who comes across as “everyone’s daughterâ€. While most of the limited public interest in previous Toronto shootings focused on the general menace of gangs (resulting in half-baked quick-fix solutions and/or slurs against the demographic of the shooters) there has been a concerted effort to focus on Creba as a valued life:
“It’s touched each one of us in Toronto, one of our own sisters, her life cut short by a gun,” – comment to the Toronto Star
“what a tragic end to a life with such potential. My heart goes out to the Creba family, and Jane’s friends. I only wonder why such a horrible things have to happen to such a wonderful young life†– posted to Creba’s online memorial
“I cannot imagine the pain you must feel at this moment on the tragic loss of Jane, She looks like a great person and I know that she’ll be miss alot. Toronto and the entire nation is standing side by side, mourning with you at this time. I sincerely hope that you can find the inner strength in the days and months ahead and my thoughts and prayers go out to you all.†– posted to Creba’s online memorial
Why were Huxtable and Miller not worthy of this sympathy? The apparent double-standard makes one wonder what people really meant when they were ok with ‘them killing each other’. Were people really referring to just the gang members?
The positive outcome of this sad double-standard is that the politicians and judicial system, under intense public pressure, will finally work on creating new laws and enforcing existing laws to keep those accused and convicted of gun crimes off the streets. It’s unfortunate that 52 people had to be killed by handgun before mayor David Miller and provincial/national politicians realized this problem wasn’t going to go away via blaming the U.S. or banning guns that are already prohibited. Still, one has to wonder whether we’d all be falling over ourselves to demand government action had Jane been another Mohamed or Shaquan.
We live in a democracy and politicians –who still need to be re-elected no matter how worthlessly they behave while in office- are ultimately captive to our collective will. As such, the people of Canada must begrudgingly share blame in the death of Jane Creba.
Update: Jane Creba - 1 Month Later
Update (June 13): Deaths = 1, Arrests = 25, Lessons Learned = 0
Recent Comments