Some Random Predictions for Next Year (2010)

With Some Trepidation I look back at my predictions for this past year:


In Politics:

Civic - Jim Watson will become the new Mayor of Ottawa. CORRECT

Provincial - McGuinty's popularity will continue to decline and we may well see his resignation prior to year's end. PARTIALLY CORRECT

Federal - There will not be an Election in 2010. Tory popularity will continue to rise and Harper will do his damnedest to force (embarrass) the Opposition Parties into voting non-confidence - but all to no avail. This effort will begin with Harper's March Budget. CORRECT

Obama's popularity will continue to decline and the Republicans will make major gains in both the House and the Senate this coming November. CORRECT


The Economy:

The markets in Canada, the United States and around the world will continue to improve CORRECT

The US $ though will continue to decline, while Gold will continue to rise in value. CORRECT

The Canadian $ will surpass the American buck CORRECT (BY THE SKIN OF A LOONEY'S TEETH)

Interest rates will rise significantly in both Canada and the United States and House prices in Canada will decline significantly. WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS

Oil prices will range between $60 and $80. PARTIALLY CORRECT - BUT VERY RECENTLY PRICES HAVE EXCEEDED $90.

Taxes will rise ...a no brainer. DAH


The Environment:

Will be much less an issue. BANG ON

Copenhagen will soon be forgotten and Al Gore will be increasingly discredited. CORRECT

The Oil Sands will be more widely accepted. CORRECT


Afghanistan and Terrorism:

The American Surge will prove successful and the fight against world terrorism will be stepped up. This will be due primarily to a conversion on the part of President Obama with him beginning to accept that the only way to deal with bad guys is through superior force. CORRECT

Acts of Terrorism will unfortunately be stepped up with some occurring in the United States itself. PARTIALLY CORRECT


On balance I think I did okay - you be the Judge. My Predictions for the coming year (2011) to follow.

As I see it...

Note: if there are any subjects that you believe I overlooked or if you wish reasons for my above predictions please just let me know.

"Galagher"

The Day Santa Blew Into Town...

Or more accurately ...The Day His Parade Blew Out.



In my last Blog, I mentioned George Coling's Station Wagon - with the Loud Speakers on Top and it brought back Memories of Brighton's Santa Claus Parade on a Cold, Windy Saturday in late November in the very early 1960s.



Those were the days, in our small community, when the Parade's music came from sources other than a marching band - hence the need for Station Wagon & Loud Speakers.



In the week's leading up to the grand event, various organizations worked diligently in the preparation of their respective Floats - local Church Organizations, Scouts and Guides, Various Service Groups and others.



As a young teen, I was a full fledged Scout and would be perched on the Scouting Float replete with bunting, paper streamers, a faux campfire and more. All placed on a flatbed farm wagon which was the norm for the Brighton Floats and each pulled by one of the local Farm Tractors.



We were to meet at the Public School Parking Lot, just to the East of Town, at 11 a.m. for final touch-ups and to line up. The Parade itself was schedule to head-out at 10 minutes to 12 in order to ensure that it reached the Town's Main Street sharply at noon.



Even as I walked down to the School Yard, children and their parents were beginning to line-up along the Main Street Route. Since Brighton, at the time was very rural, many of those families had travelled some miles to get there.



I mentioned it was cold, but that was not a big problem - other than for those lining up so early. Indeed, it was usually very cold for the Santa Claus Parade. The savings grace was that it did not take the Parade long to navigate Brighton's rather short Main Street.



No, the Big Problem that Day was the Wind: it was Relentless.



When I reached the school grounds, the Scout Float or what was left of it, was already there. The Bunting and Streamers were long gone though. Most of the Hay flooring had also vanished into the wind. Only the Faux Campfire, made from logs, remained.



As the minutes past, other Floats arrived but most had thrown in the towel in the face of the Gale and had headed back home - never reaching their intended destination. The 6 or so Floats which did brave it to the meeting place had been reduced to the bare boards of the Farm Wagon. The little of their remaining streamers and such, filled the air with an almost circus-like atmosphere.



They, in turn, slowly slunk off to their Winter Barns.



Left was only the Station Wagon and the motorized Santa Sleigh. In those days, The Sleigh was the only 'professional' float in the Parade and as such could withstand the wind.



Since a friend of mine - Allan, and I, had experience riding in the back of the Coling Station Wagon during recent Election Campaigns, we were chosen to operate the hand-cranked Victrola - an olde fashion record player (for those younger it performs the same function as a CD player / IPod); but with somewhat lesser quality.



Our music was even more bizarre - consisting of but 1 olde, scratchy 78 rpm recording of Gene Autry singing 'Rudolfe the Red Nose Reindeer'.



Off we set.

The Station Wagon in front with Santa directly behind holding on to his faux beard with all his might.

Not being held up by slow moving Floats, we travelled quickly along Highway Two - the old Trans Canada Highway which served as our Village's Main Street.

In no time we had reached the Business Section where the crowds had lined both sides - the Children viewing in awe - a jolly but wind blown Saint Nick.

I watched the parents' look of bewilderment - necks craning - in expectation of more. More Parade that is - but it was not happen.

We whistled though Town and ended up at the olde Town Hall where Santa doled out bags of Candy to all of the Excited Children. All of them - oblivious to the fact that they had just witnessed Brighton's shortest Santa Claus Parade ever.

The Parents were altogether another matter. They surrounded the poor Town Mayor and demanded that 'something be done' to avoid this type of embarrassment in the future.

And something was done. No future Parade suffered the ignominy experienced by that one in late November in the early 1960s. Future Parades contained more 'professional' floats.

But when I think back to that day - I can still see the excitement and smiles in the children's eyes.

And I was glad to have played a part in bringing them joy.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

PATRONAGE...a dirty word?

Not at all.



Given my strong feelings in favour of deep-sixing the Senate, you might assume that I am down on Patronage. Not so.



I just believe, for reasons previously and amply given, the Senate is a waste of time for everyone - Partisans included.


When I say that I am in favour of Patronage, I am speaking about the placement of Partisans in key (sensitive) government positions such as positions that render quasi-judicial decisions. Such positions, are known as Governor in Council (GIC) Appointments, and can be found on various Tribunals and Boards such as the Refugee Board, the Veteran's Pension Board, and the National Parole Board etc. These GIC appointments are made by the Prime Minister himself.

Let me be perfectly clear though, I am not speaking of favouritism in the letting of Contracts such as we witnessed in the Quebec Advertising Scandal. Contracts are for specific goods or services and it matters not whether the person or persons supplying those needs are political or not. We must adhere to a strict Tendering Process for Contracts, otherwise we descend into the Realm of the Banana Republic.


I continue...

The Patronage, I support - the placement of Partisans in key government positions - performs two important and essential roles in modern day democracies.



First, it mobilizes people to form / back a political organization for the purpose of seeing that their organization attains power. Can't you just imagine 300 plus Members of Parliament trying to operate independently - without Party affiliation. I cringe. Think of how hard it is for your local Council to reach a consensus and they have far fewer members. So for Democracy to work, people are needed to come together to form and support a Party. In recent experience, we have the example of Preston Manning and his Reformers coming together to form the Reform Party which in due course merged with the Progressive Conservatives to form today's governing Conservatives.


These concerned citizens come together, albeit not totally without self-serving expectations, but most are highly motivated to better their country.


In my own case, I have been a Tory supporter since I was 11 or 12 when I started to put up campaign signs around our village. I still remember fondly traveling the County of Northumberland in George Coling's station wagon equipped with one of those roof top loud speakers advertising an upcoming Tory Election Get-together. What fun!


My reward was the excitement of being involved in real Election Campaigns. As I grew older, my involvement increased but I never profited financially from it. My reward was confined to trying to make our Province / Country a better place in which to live; that was all the reward I needed. That said, I do not have difficulty seeing others benefit as a return on their volunteer hours for helping their Party achieve Power.

In that regard, I well remember being responsible for determining which of our County's Law Firms would obtain non-tendered federal law work during the time of Joe Clark's Government in 1979. (Not being in a major centre, my own small firm did not qualify for any of this government business). The hue and cry though that went up from the Liberal Law Firms was something to behold. Why, "they had done this work for decades and now it was arbitrarily being taken away from them". The Liberal Press was full of the horror stories. And yet, when Clark's Government fell but 9 months later and that legal work returned to those same Liberal Firms, not a word was said: not by the Tory Law Firms which barely had time to issue their first bills; not by the Liberal Firms which viewed the return of this work as their just due, and more importantly, not by the Liberal Press which considered all things Liberal to be right.



Second, Patronage enables the winning Party to put their stamp on government. Without loyal supporters in place, it is much more difficult, indeed nay impossible, to roll out the Party's Platform.



Allow me to provide you with some personal examples. I worked for a number of Departments that contained GIC appointments and later in my career, I even held such a position myself for a brief period of three years. (I may someday write a Blog on that very trying but interesting period).



In any event, I remember speaking with one such GIC Appointee of the previous Government, who decided to resign his post due to the fact that he readily admitted he was not "philosophically in tune with the new Government". (I can tell you that such resignations did not happen very often and it was a credit to his honour that he did so). This chap had initially been appointed due to his 'liberal' philosophy which was evident in his Board Decisions. With the recent Election of a Conservative Government, the need for a more Conservative approach to Decision Making was now called for.

When I worked for the Minister of Veterans Affairs, in the mid 1980s, we entered office at a time when a Commission had been struck to determine why decisions on Veterans' Disability Pensions were taking so long and were too often negatively decided. The first thing our Minister did was to shut down the Commission since he did not want to wait a year or more for its recommendations. He knew what needed to be done and his Philosophy of Speed and Generosity was soon absorbed by the GIC community. Within mere months, Veterans and their Representatives such as the Royal Canadian Legion noticed a vast improvement in the decision making process.

In recent years, another area of concern has arisen with respect to the the determination of who qualifies for Refugee Status. Simply stated, the process provides applicants with an end run around the formal immigration application process. When individuals are suffering true persecution, this end run is understandable. Too often though it is used by unscrupulous smugglers to defeat the true purpose of Canada's Refugee System. Under the Liberal Administration, the vast majority of GIC Decisions were favourable
to the Refugee Applicants even though it was conceded that only a minority were true Refugees. The Liberals were more focused on voter support from the ethnic communities.

Since the Election of the Conservatives, favourable decisions in Refugee Cases are now in the minority which is consistent with the view held by the average Canadian and, as I mentioned, is in keeping with the overwhelming consensus that most applicants are true Refugees (i.e. in danger of Persecution).


Finally, there is also a misconception out there that government appointees are not hard working - that their roles are both cushy and plum. Again, this is not true from my experience.




Given their background - hard and faithful work on behalf of a Party - the appointees for the most part are prepared to do what it takes to make a difference (i.e. they are already motivated). From the outside it may look plush, but in reality it has often meant disruption to the appointees and their families since in many cases they are obliged to uproot and move to a new city. Often their work entails writing decisions which are then subject to review by the Federal Court. Having been a Legal Advisor to a number of GICs I can tell you first hand that such writing is not an easy task.



Then there is the travel. It all sounds quite glamorous - being in different cities each week - living in nice hotels etc., and it is - for a week or two. After that it is a drudge. Living out of a suitcase and logging thousands of miles on plane soon loses its appeal.

Bottom-line; We are indebted to our Partisans and owe them a vote of thanks.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

The Nerve of the Have-Nots and Where is PEI on the Issue?

Ontario and Quebec are at Copenhagen this week where they have gone on record as opposing any subsidy on their part to assist Alberta in achieving carbon reduction.

The nerve!!

To begin with, what the Hell are Provinces doing at Copenhagen? International Forums are State and not a Provincial matters; a Country needs to speak with one voice - not three.

Anyway, back to the issue of these two ingrates.

Over past decades Quebec has benefited mightily from the huge transfer payments it receives from Alberta.

Ontario, as Canada's manufacturer, too has benefited greatly by selling its finished goods to the West. Now, ironically, it too may start to receive Western Transfer Monies as a result of its new Have not status. Plus, where does Ontario expect to receive its future Oil supplies?

Where is the equity - the fairness in their self-serving stance?

If Quebec had oil, as opposed to water power, you can bet your bottom dollar that they would oppose any attempt by the ROC to impose carbon caps. Such an issue alone would likely be enough to see Separation finally come about.

It may just have this effect for Alberta - and perhaps Saskatchewan. While the numbers favouring separation have been low in the West, compared to those in Quebec, this issue, if left unchecked, is likely to spike those numbers considerably. And for the West - Separation will be no Bluff.

In the interim, it will certainly help the Wild Rose Party become the next Provincial Government.

As Ralph Klein, a great Canadian so aptly said a few years back, 'let the Eastern Bastards freeze in the Dark'.

We deserve no less.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

OBAMA'S Address at West Point

About a week ago, President Obama gave a speech at West Point wherein he increased the US troop strength in Afghanistan by 30,000. Interestingly, they are to be deployed in the Kandahar District where our soldiers have been fighting due to the fact that it is the most dangerous spot in all of Afghanistan. Canadian Soldiers deserve quite a pat on the back for single-handedly keeping that area under control awaiting American reinforcements.

Anyway, I digress.

I thought his speech deserved an A (ie 8/10) but was surprised by the comments from both sides of the debate in America. The Right roundly condemned it for being unlike FDR - ie "a Day that will live in Infamy' and not Churchillian enough (ie) "we will fight them on the beaches.."

But Obama was not reeling from an attack or preparing the nation for imminent invasion - he was only adding 30,000 fresh troops to the mix.

The Left, in turn, cried 'sellout' and compared Obama with George W and his Surge in Iraq. But Afghanistan is not Iraq. The attacks on the Trade Buildings were planned and originated from Afghanistan.

My 'A' for the speech was based on the fact that Obama had to walk a tight rope between these two camps and the fact that he upset them both tells me he succeeded. He authorized the additional troops, requested by his Commanders in the field and he set an arbitrary timetable to get out which he hoped would appeal to his leftist base.

Having said that, both sides arguments have some merit. First, the Surge worked wonders for the Republicans in Iraq and hopefully it will do the same this time. No guarantees though.

Second - setting the arbitrary timetable puts the Afghan Administration on notice that they will soon have to take care of their own security - as it should be. It also puts NATO on notice that the US is not going to continue to spend vast sums of money and blood when most Member Countries sit back with their feet up.

As I have said before it is no longer just a philosophical discussion - the USA is going broke. With Trillions in debt, they simply can no longer afford to play the World Policeman as much as they and we may like for them to do just that.

I have serious concerns re President Obama. I have yet to figure the guy out but do know that he is spending too much and building too great a government empire.

What I do know is that I liked his speech and think it worthy of an 'A'.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

Taliban Prisoners...Peter MacKay

Note: below I am critical of Peter MacKay for allegedly saying Richard Colvin was a lackey of the Taliban. The Press had widely reported that he had said just that but MacKay has come out and denied it. With the little regard I have for our leftist Press, I will take MacKay's word any day... That said, I still think his overall criticism of a public servant was not becoming a Minister of the Crown. Unless it is a criminal act or some wantoned disregard of duty, He and Harper should leave criticisms to a public servant's senior managers.

A tempest in a teapot.

Iggnatieff and the Liberal Press believe they have Defence Minister MacKay 'on the ropes' over the Detainee / Torture Issue. Both are simply deluding themselves.

The fact is, Canadians really don't give a damn if heartless murderers are roughed up a bit in detention.

More to the point, if the Defence Brass only became aware of one case as of yesterday, how does that implicate MacKay in a cover-up? Where do Iggy and the Press expect MacKay to get his information from - the Taliban?

Iggnatief has a habit of getting on the wrong horse at the right time and I believe he has done it again. Moreover, I cannot see this issue surviving the Christmas break since Liberal MPs are likely to get an earful from their constituents - in support of Mackay - over that period.

MacKay though is not without criticism; his over the top attack on Ambassador Richard Colvin was not called for. I too question Colvin's motivation in all of this but for MacKay to suggest he was being a lackey of the Taliban was a bit much.

That brings me to recent speculation that there will be a small Cabinet Shuffle over Christmas.

The feeling is that MacKay will be transferred out of Defence.

If I was MacKay, I would not fight that move - not because of the 'Colvins' of this Country, but because the real Defence Minister is none other than Stephen Harper himself.

I get the sense that there is no love lost between the two - this despite the fact that Harper could never have become Leader of the new Conservative Party without Peter's help. Simply stated, he is not likely to advance in the current situation. Plus he has already had his shot at Leadership when he led the Progressive Conservative Party before its amalgamation with Reform.

Peter MacKay needs to look ahead - to his next step. And might I suggest a Senate appointment. This coming from me - a staunch opponent of everything Senate.

I make this suggestion though not in what MacKay could add to this tired old Institution, but rather to what he could do for the Conservatives outside its stifling walls. He could become the true and lasting God Father for Atlantic Canada in the same way in which the wily old Senator Allan MacEachen performed this role for the Liberals.

If I was Harper I would refrain from making such an appointment until right after the next Election but circumstances could force his hand sooner.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

Somethings Rotten In the State of Denmark

Global Warming is finally beginning to smell..

I have always had trouble believing that CO2 - a colourless, odorless gas used in photosynthesis, poses a threat to the world's climate.

That said, I view myself as an environmentalist since I am - and I expect you are - opposed to pollution of any type. After all, the world we live in is the only one we have and we would like to pass it on to our children and our children's children in as pristine of condition as possible.

For some reason though the left has seized on CO2 as being the bad guy in it all. I can see why Al Gore has done so - he of many mansions, has been able to increase his wealth tenfold due to this scam.

But what of the rest? Where is their concern when it comes to dirty air and water? Why do they not take a better look at the hidden contents of the food and water we drink and eat?

Why should trillions of dollars be transferred to so-called underdeveloped countries (I say "so-called" since China falls under that category) to reduce their CO2 emissions when we know well that this is unlikely to happen?

Would these trillions not be better spent providing food, medical and housing assistance to the world's poor and education for their children? It is a scandal that the United Nations has been in existence for over 60 years and these terrible issues remain unresolved. But the UN finds time to criticize Israel for everything under the sun!

As a Libertarian I see government's role to be a very limited one. But there is one important area where they can be useful and that is in the area of R&D. Working in conjunction with Industry and Universities - Governments can spearhead research in the area of Environmental Protection. We know that the burning of fossil fuels is not Environmentally friendly - so we desperately need to find viable alternatives and government is best placed to do that.

Much has been done in this area but so much more remains before Western Civilization can ween itself off fossil fuels. It is too bad that the oil crisis of the 1970s was allowed to pass without a serious attempt to find alternative power sources. We have lost 40 years due to this inaction.

The Left would have us in the West live in tents while the Rest of the World continues to pump CO2 into the atmosphere in ever increasing amounts.

It won't happen. The instinct for our survival is just too strong.

Let's though work together and clean up all Pollution - CO2 included, in a structured and reasoned fashion.

In the meantime, monies for transfer to the Underdevelops should be targeted to ending poverty where it will do so much good.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

CHINA- Who Lost Face?

Just Who Lost Face Mr. Ignatieff?

Yesterday the Chinese Leadership "dressed down" our Prime Minister for not genuflecting before their massive industrial and yes, dictatorial State.

Ignatieff was quick out of the blocks bemoaning the 'fact' that Harper had not only lost face personally; he had also lost face on behalf of all of Canada. The shame.

Give your head a shake Michael - some loss of face. China is a Totalitarian State where it imprisons or kills its political opponents and is not above harvesting their organs.

Those who suck up to China must do so at the expense of down playing their extreme human rights abuses.

And, it is they who have lost faith.

From the start, I have tried to give Ignatieff the benefit of the doubt but have now reached the limit of my patience.

Remember too, Ignatieff's recent assertion that Quebec was not getting its fair share of the bail out monies. As if.

There appears to be no lows to which he will stoop. And so much for his new Advisors.

There was much celebration later in the day when China finally added Canada to its "approved destination status".

We are now in the agust company of such distinguished Human Rights Promotors as: Cuba; Burma; Ghana; Pakistan; Sri Lanka; Syria; Uganda; and Zimbabwe. Imagine? Aren't we fortunate.

I was listening to the Business Channel where its guests were unanimous in finding that Harper has been remiss in not pursuing more ties with China. 'We in Canada have lost so much economically due to his misguided approach'.

Well I have news for these so-called experts - it is China that has lost out by pursuing its ruthless agenda. Moreover, they are and industrial giant - and therefore makes things.

Indeed, any country can manufacture items but Canada is in the unique position of having the scarce resources needed make that happen. There is no limit across the world for our valuable resources.

Bottomline, China needs Canada more than we need China.

As I see it..

Note: I asked for input re my recent article on Caledonia and was disappointed by the limited reply. Only 6 came in - 4 in favour of police action and 1 in favour of a status quo approach. The 6th said he was undecided but leaning to taking action. I found his rationale of interest:

"If I was Premier and knew that police action would likely result in the death of human beings I would have trouble making that decision. I understand the importance of enforcing the Rule of Law but to know someone may have to die to enforce it is sobering for me."

"Galagher"

CALEDONIA

Okay let's get back to some current events...

CALEDONIA

A small quiet city of 10,000 situated on the picturesque Grand River a short drive south from Hamilton.



It's name dates back to the Roman name for Scotland.



It's tranquility though was shattered beginning in late 2005 when the Six Nations Indian Band warned of violence if certain lands in Caledonia were developed as a subdivision.



Violence did soon ensue with one resident of the city so badly beaten he nearly died. Road blocks by the Tribe went up and since then, a general reign of terror has been waged against the populace.



The Province under the stewardship of Dalton McGuinty has taken a hands off approach throughout.



McGuinty also approved the purchase of the contested lands, by the Province, at an inflated value and then more or less ceded those lands over the the Six Nations.

The Indians were rewarded for their lawlessness.



And the hostilities continue.



It is not my intention to use this Blog to incite - there has been enough of that in the local papers of late documenting the terrible suffering of one particular family at the hands of the natives even though their home is situated outside of the disputed boundary.



What I'd rather do is look at this issue from two sides: first from the side of the Premier and then from the side of the Caledonians themselves.



I am not going to consider the concerns of the natives since I strongly believe that they lost the right to our sympathy once they resorted to violence. Plus, for a more thorough look at the native issue, I refer you back to an earlier Blog where I conclude the Reserve System is in need of disbanding.



Okay - The Premier's Position:

• With Ipperwash still fresh in his mind and the death of the native Dudley George, he has rightfully concluded that if he attempts to 'police' the situation in Caledonia - more death will follow.


• Given this, he has placed the natives above the law and has relegated the citizens of Caledonia to second class status.


• Finally, he is counting on the matter remaining a local concern and thereby hopes the rest of the Province will remains uninterested (read apathetic).

The Caledonians:

• The accounts that I have read indicate that the locals feel betrayed by their own provincial government - that they have been left to violent hands without police protection.


• They cannot understand that a country like Canada, which prides itself on respecting the Rule of Law and the promotion of equal rights for all citizens, can stand back and allow this insurrection to occur.
• Residents have been arrested for trying to protect themselves and their property. Some have been injured - some seriously, and many believe that one or more or their numbers will be killed before this is all settled - if it ever gets settled.

My thoughts:

If the Natives are permitted to get away with violence in Calendonia to achieve their aims - as has been the case here, it sends a message to other Tribes across the country that this is the way to go rather than waste their time with slow legal negotiations.

YOU DECIDE:

Okay, you have heard the arguments - now you decide.

Pretend you are the Premier for a day - what would you do?

a) send the police / army in to break-up the rebellion, or...

b) continue to keep a cap on things and avoid any official conflict for the purpose of avoiding more serious injury and most certainly death.

I look forward to your answers which I will publish at a later date.

"Galagher"

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY

It is time that I get back to some current events - there is so much going on - but before I do, I would like to look one more time to the past.



Kennedy was assassinated 46 years ago this week - November 22, 1963. He too was only 46.



For the first time though, I was unable to find any mention of the anniversary in our local papers. And, probably the time has come to relegate this sad date to the past.



But before I do....



As many of you know, I plan to one day get back to my Blog on how things dramatically changed in the 1960's and that even today we are experiencing the fall-out from that time - most of it to our collective detriment. President Kennedy's death followed by Martin Luther King Jr. and his brother Bobby - all in the 60's - was the end of the Age of Innocence and therefore falls into the category of events that forever mark the 1960s as the major turning point - certainly in our time and probably in the last one hundred years and more.



Kennedy had two major accomplishments; one during his lifetime and the other post his death:

The Cuban Missile Crisis was his greatest lifetime achievement. He alone literally avoided an Atomic War.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff to a man, strongly recommended that JFK launch air bombardments on the Cuban missile sites. At one point, their discussions amongst themselves was taped and several years ago I listened to this tape which was played on television. The Chiefs were highly critical of Kennedy and viewed him as being nothing more than a young naive pup who was poorly placed to make such a critical decision. Their language was quite 'salty' in nature.

Even his Cabinet was pro military solution, save for one - his brother Bobby the then Attourney General. Kennedy had taken great heat for appointing his brother to Cabinet which the then pundits condemned as blatant Nepotism. But it is doubtful that John Kennedy could have remained resolute against a military strike had it not been for Bobby's sage counsel.

History shows that the Russian Generals, posted to Cuba, had been given orders to launch an Atomic Response to any military action on the part of America. It also shows that their missiles were armed and ready for firing.

Kennedy opted instead for a sea embargo of Cuba which ultimately led to successful negotiations with Kruschev and the rest, as they say, is history.

Kennedy's other great accomplishment occurred as a result of his death.

• The Civil Rights Legislation of 1964/65

This monumental legislation, freed the Blacks from institutional discrimination and was spearheaded by Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson. However, Johnson would not have been able to achieve this success had it not been for Kennedy's death since it was passed into law in his memory.

There was also a negative that flowed from his assassination - the escalation of the Vietnam War.

During Kennedy's tenure, the war in Vietnam was limited in involvement to American Military Advisors. With Kennedy's death, LBJ was able to tap into the outpouring of sympathy to dramatically increase the US military presence in that tragic land.

Indeed, when Bobby was assassinated in June of 1968, he was running for the Democratic Presidential Nomination - against LBJ, on a platform to end that war.

As I said, it is probably time to let President Kennedy go.

This very November, 50 years ago, John Fitzgerarld Kennedy was elected the 35th President of the United States. His star shone brightly; but today it is but a glimmer.

For those of us who lived through his death though, it will continue to shine forever.

As I see it,

"Galagher"

Ralph and Betty and their next door neighbour Fred

The day after their meeting with their new Personal Money Manager (PMM), Ralph and Betty are sitting on the front step of their new home when along comes their older neighbour Fred.





"Why so glum"? asks, Fred.





We are selling our new home, replies Ralph.





Just when I was starting to like you folks - how come?





Our PMM says it is in our best interest. We even have to sell our car.





Hey - I'll buy it.





Fred, why would you want our Honda - You already have a good family car?





Not the Honda - it's the Van I want.





Ralph and Betty look at each other and then Ralph responds: "the Van is not for sale - we are going to continue to have need of it".





Whatever for, asks Fred.





A tear creeps down Betty's cheek - but neither reply.





Fred breaks the silence. I thought you guys were happy here and the ding.., I mean your children seemed to have settled in quite nicely.





That's just the problem, replied Betty; Ralph and I and the kids just love our new home and we just hate to leave here, but our PMM says it is imperative that we do.





The discussion went on to include RRSPs, RESPs and TFSA's and the like.





You have no idea how hard it is for families like ours these days Fred.





What do you mean by that? Margaret and I had 3 kids too you know and it was only me working outside the home. Things turned out pretty good for us.





Our oldest is a Pharmacist, our middle girl - a Manager and our youngest, is a Registered Nurse. We have our home paid for and no debts to our name. Plus we have never had so much money to live on.





"How so? The money part I mean", asked Betty?





Margaret and I both receive the OAS, the CPP, and the monthly Gains Cheque. We have never been so well off.





Wow, said Betty. That's incredible.





"So how did you pay off your home", piped in Ralph?





We rented until we saved up a big enough down payment to keep the payments manageable. And we amortized it over the course of the rest of my working life. The final year of my employment saw the mortgage paid off in its entirety.





Okay, what about the post secondary education for your 3 children? That must have nearly bankrupted you?





Hell no, we told our kids they were on their own. Get a job, and get student loans. Margaret and I realized that kids only value things if they have to pay for it themselves.





You mean you didn't help them at all?





Unfortunately, no. We provided them with free room and board while they attended school.



Any Regrets, asked Ralph?



Just one; we should have charged them rent!!



Still interested in buying our van Fred?

------------------------------------------------

Note - the above is my effort at a 'tongue in cheek' look at this industry. In reality though, and as a Libertarian, I see the value - on a number of levels - of having individuals plan for their retirements and not depend on Big Government. There is great value in seeking out the advice of a credited Financial Planner employed at any of Canada's five major Banks.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Personal Money Managers

A short while ago, I wrote a Blog on 'Stock Market Prognosticators' and how very adept they all are at determing how the Market will perform - albeit, a day or two after the fact.




Today lets take a look at your Personal Money Managers.



You know, the ones you see mentioned in the financial section of your local newspaper.



These are the folks who review your financial status and provide you with advice on how best to prepare for your retirement.



So like the newspaper, we'll take a look at a Case Study (entirely fictitious of course):



Let's look at Ralph and Betty and their 3 ding a lings - I mean children.



Ralph and Betty are in their late 30s and the ages of their children range from 4 to 12 years.



Mr. works for privately owned company and Mrs. is employed by a non-profit organization. Their combined annual income totals approximately $100K.



Within the past year, they moved from a townhouse into a single detached home where they are all very happy.



She drives a fairly modern Honda Civic, while his mode of transport consists of a rather ancient Van.



The other day, Betty casually mentioned to her husband that it will not be too much longer before they will have to give serious consideration to how they will fund a post secondary education for their eldest. Ralph agreed, and added that they should also start to give serious consideration to planning financially for their retirement.



The problem they both recognized, was that after paying their monthly expenses, there was little or nothing left over for such savings.



Not to worry, they agreed that they would contact a Personal Money Manager (PMM) for his or her sage advice.



It did not take the PMM long to hone in on the problem:

Gross Income - $100k

Expenses:

• Taxes of all kinds - except realty taxes - $40k


• Mortgage - Principal, Interest and Realty Taxes - $21.5k


• Food, Clothing etc - $15k


• Car Payment (Honda) / Car Repairs - $4.5k


• Heat & Hydro - $3.5k


• Repairs to Home - $3k
• Insurance of all kinds (house / car / life/ disability) - $3.5k
  
• Entertainment (including cable vision, internet) - $4K


• Miscel - $5 k

"Your annual income is entirely cancelled out by your annual expenses" proclaimed the PMM.




What to do?




'Ralph and Betty, you have to immediately start to save for your retirements and for the cost of post secondary education for your 3 children and I suggest you the following course of action:"

• Each of you need to open an RRSP Account - for Mr. that would mean an annual contribution of $10,800 (18% of his annual income) and for Mrs. a further $7,200.



• You also need to open an Education Account for each of your 3 children and be sure to contribute at least enough to realize the government's maximum co-contribution. (formula) For the 3 children this would mean an annual contribution from their parents $7,500 ($2,500 per child to receive the government per capital grant of $500).



• And, of course you each must open your own new Tax Free Saving Account which will add an additional $10,000 to your annual bill.



• Oh, one more thing. It is prudent to have at least 6 months worth of income in a saving's account in case of the unexpected (e.g. the loss of one or both of your jobs) - $50,000.

Mr. and Mrs. sit dumbstruck. PMM sits with a great big smile on his face basking in the sageness of his advice.

Finally, Ralph clears his throat and manages to get the following out - but that totals nearly $90,000. "We don't have anything left over now - where are we going to get that much additional money?"

"That's why you came to me".

First you need to sell your home. That will save you mortgage payments, realty taxes, heat & hydro, and of course there will be no need for repairs.

Second, you need to sell one of your cars.

"My van"?

"No, you are going to need the van - I am talking about the Honda. With its sale you will get out from under $3,500 in annual car payments".

"Whaaat else"?

Glad you asked...

Now with respect to Food & Clothing. Have you thought of the Food Bank? Plus there are more second hand clothing stores than you can shake a stick at.

"Where'd we live?" asked Mr.

"Ah, that's why you are keeping your Van"!!

As I see it...

"Galagher"

p.s. My next Blog will deal with financial advice from their elderly neighbour.

The Monarchy ...encore..- Pt. 2

Andrew Coyne's two suggestions to improve our current system to better involve the Monarchy are as follows:

1. Have the Monarch once again appoint the GG and do so via members of her immediate family - e.g. the Prince of Wales; his brother Andrew etc etc. Or,

2. Discard the GG's office altogether and have the Queen or King directly liaise with the Government.

I see some merit in the first suggestion but do not see it being a viable solution for a number of reasons, including:

• Family of the Monarch is not the Monarch itself. And, to have the existing Canadian appointment process replaced by Brits - other than the Monarch him or herself - would not be supported by Quebecers nor by our so called left-wing elite. Even, I, on the right, would ultimately have trouble with it.

With respect to Andrew's second suggestion - I like it. Doesn't mean though it will ever happen.

• The current system is dysfunctional. Currently you have Canadians playing 'Queen for the Day' when all they are in fact doing is usurping the power of both our Prime Minister and the ruling Monarch. In the recent Prorogation Crisis did Madame Jean even consult with Queen Elizabeth? As her Representative she most certainly should have. And if she did, was the decision arrived at - her decision or the Queen's decision - the latter being the appropriate one.
• With current communications, the GG position as a intermediary is no longer needed. The PM can pick-up the telephone and speak with Her Majesty irrespective of where either of them may be in the world. They can even use Video Conferencing if they wish.
• Simply stated, the King or Queen of Canada no longer needs a representative in their ever less 'far flung empires'.

I think this second suggestion has the potential of breathing more life into a splendid and very worthwhile tradition. The Monarch would though have to become more visible here in Canada and his or her role as the Head of the Anglican Church would have to come to an end for obvious reasons.

Okay, that said, I am not confident that this important Institution will last given the opposition of so many Canadians and given the apathy of so many others.

I have stated my reasons why I think we desperately need to keep the Monarchy but there is one final one that I have yet to touch on.

In recent decades Canada has opened its borders to millions from around the world - with different cultures, different languages, different religions etc. This has been a welcomed development because Canada desperately needs immigration given our aging population. But one negative side effect is that it has resulted in less and less commonality with fewer and fewer symbols to help keep us together as a Nation.

The Monarchy is one of those Institutions that has been tested by the sands of time and accordingly gives us all something to be proud of and to respect.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

The Monarchy ...encore..

The other day I wrote half a Blog on why we should retain the Monarchy.

Then, on Thursday eve, I watched CBC's 'The Panel' and it dealt entirely with this important subject.

The breakdown was as follows:

• Chantal - is opposed to the continuance of the Monarchy since Quebecers have never and will never accept it.



• Allan - is in favour of keeping it, even though he sees the institution having little support across the country, since he believes that there are too many legal ramifications involved in changing to another system.



• Andrew - is in favour of keeping the Monarchy since he sees it as being a great asset in the preservation of our special democratic way of life. Plus, he put forward a couple of suggestions to modernize the institution.
  

I was not surprised by the position taken by Chantal. Given their history as a 'conquered' peoples, Quebecers are most unlikely to support anything with a British connection. In fact, I would likely be of that frame of mind had I been born a Francophone Quebecer.

That does not make their position correct - it does though make it understandable.

Allan's thoughts on the matter were new to me - in that I had never really considered the legal ramifications involved in changing to another system of government - i.e. a Republic. From my perspective his concern, although a major consideration, should not be the deciding factor in determining whether or not to retain a system that is seriously flawed.

That said, I do not see our current system as being fatally flawed.

That brings me to Andrew. I was delighted with the position he took since many of the reasons he gave in support of the Monarchy were included in my earlier Blog.

Permit me to summarize these reasons:

• The Monarchy is an institution that has survived over 13 Centuries and as such provides us with both tradition, custom as well as stability. An institution that transcends the centuries is something that has earned our respect.




• It is above politics, and therefore brings a much needed neutral, non-biased approach which is especially valuable in times of crisis;

• And for those who hate all things American (not me) - it provides a political system different from that of our large neighbour.

And, speaking of the States - you will recall George W. Bush's first election when the results were held up pending the 'Chad' fiasco in Florida. That incident had the potential of extending beyond the traditional Inauguration Day. Had it done so, the US would have been without an Elected President pending Judicial Decision on the Election outcome. As it was, it became very chaotic time with no Government in Waiting.

It is this type of situation where an impartial Monarch would be invaluable. For instance, a King or Queen could have stepped in and extended the term of the current President - Bill Clinton until the matter had been resolved by the Courts.

Another example also comes to mind. During Richard Nixon's second term, Watergate was tearing his Administration apart. There was concern expressed over his mental health during that trying period and there was some speculation that he was unstable enough to try to assume control of the government via use of the military.

Whether that was in fact true is not at issue here. The fact is, it could have happened, and may at some future date, actually happen. A Monarch would be the only one ideally placed to deal with such a situation in that He or She would be a neutral party that the populace could rally round.

Pity though, the United States does not have a Monarch to fall back on in times of need.

One more - Russia.

Those of you a little older can recall the attempt by the old guard in Russia to thwart the democratization of that country by arresting President Gorbachev and closing their Parliament. Had it not been for the courage of Boris Yeltsin climbing up on one their tanks and demanding that Gorbachev be released, the Coup would most likely have succeeded.

Should a similar event occur again, there is no guarantee that a Yeltsin will be available to climb up on a tank.

They too could use benign Monarchy.

I have gone on far too long.

Tomorrow I will deal with Andrew's two suggestions for the improvement of our Monarchy as well as considering one additional reason why I see the Monarchy as being an important institution for our future welfare.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

REMEMBRANCE

Janice Kennedy's 'Poppy' Dilemma

Ms. Kennedy is a writer for Ottawa's left of centre newspaper and this week she wrote an article setting out in great detail the dilemma she has on whether or not to wear a poppy.

In her own words: "How do I wear a poppy that recognizes the terrible sacrifices --- of Second World War Veterans when so many poppies today recognize (our veterans) deaths in Afghanistan"? (i.e. a war that she does not support)

The trouble Ms. Kennedy is having is that she too is getting a distorted view of things given her left wing perspective.

The Poppy is a strong symbol that does not glorify war -rather, it does the exact opposite. One of its main purposes is to help insure that we never forget the sacrifice of our soldiers made and to be ever vigilante to avoid war if at all possible. And of course, the other main purpose of the Poppy is to remember those Canadians who paid the supreme sacrifice on behalf of our country.

So in the case of Afghanistan, the Poppy continually reminds us that war is failure - a last resort - and certainly not something to be glamorized. And our soldiers who die there are equally entitled to our remembrances as were their counterparts in previous wars.

Janice - you can wear your poppy proudly - without the worry of being branded a pro-war.

That was never its purpose.


Medals for Stupidity

This week the Governor General awarded a new medal - The Sacrifice Medal, which among other things is awarded to those who die overseas as a result of military service.

So I suspect that the family of a soldier killed in an automobile accident would receive such a medal posthumously. And rightfully so. The soldier would not have been in that unfriendly environment otherwise.

But where I draw the line would be if that accident occurred as a result of the soldier driving intoxicated. Under those circumstances, I do not see a medal being deserved.

That leads me to the case this week, where a soldier's family was awarded the medal as a result of their son being killed in a game of chicken with firearms. If that indeed was the reason for his death - I do not see that it warrants special recognition.

My father was wounded twice in the Second World War - the first time as a result of one of his fellows playing with their rifle. The gun went off and the bullet ricocheted around the interior of Dad's Tank hitting him in the leg - had the chap who caused the incident been injured or killed, I would hope he or his family would not have been awarded a medal for doing so.

There should not be an award for stupidity.


Your Nearest Cenotaph

On those notes - get out to your nearest Cenotaph this morning and wear your Poppy Proudly.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

John Proctor's Ghost

Not the Ghost of John Proctor...



Mr. Proctor had his own personal ghost.



My home town of Brighton, Ontario had but one real Ghost and as I said, it was not John Proctor.



Proctor was a wealthy businessman who lived during the 1800s and during that time he built a large mansion that overlooked our fair village. His home was to the north of town less than a rifle shot away from the village grave yard.



On top of the Proctor home was a widow's walk where it is said Proctor kept close watch on his many ships entering and leaving Brighton harbour which in turn led to Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence.



As a prosperous businessman, Proctor had many workers toiling on his behalf one of which was a poor soul by the name of Nix. Nix was married and no doubt had a bevy of little Nixes. What he did not have was money. In fact he was in debt to old man Proctor for advances made on his puny pay.



All would have gone along okay except for the fact Nix up and died. No doubt from being worked to death by Proctor.



His distraught wife came to John Proctor requesting the body of her husband for burial. To her absolute dismay, Proctor refused her request. Nix, he said, owed him $20.00 and his body would not be released to the family until said debt was paid in full. No doubt he put in an additional request for interest on the loan.



The widow having no means whatsoever, went home sans husband.



Proctor then placed Nix's body in the dank cellar of this mansion and there, over the years, it rotted - so to speak.



Now some strange happenings occurred. People living in the vicinity of the Proctor Mansion began to see at night a bright ball of fire emanate from the vicinity of the basement and fly through the air to the Town's grave yard which was located a short distance to the east. No doubt Proctor had an unrestricted view of these occurrences from his perch on high in the mansion's widow's walk.



But these occurrences unfortunately did not persuade Proctor from doing the right thing and turning over the body of Nix over to his wife and family.



I say unfortunately, since a short time later it cost Proctor, himself, his life. He was working on the barn roof next to the mansion and inexplicably fell (was pushed?) to his death.



No accident, said the locals - olde Nix had just taken his just revenge.



That's the story of Proctor's Ghost.



But let's move ahead a little.



It is now the 1950s in fair olde Brighton and yours truly and several other contemporaries are attending Johnny's 10th birthday party in February - in the evening. It was dark and on leaving the party we all decided to walk one of our number - Eric - home. Eric lived near the olde Proctor mansion and to save time we decided to cut across a few fields that cut just south of the mansion and behind the homes on Yonge Street where Eric lived.



On route, we ran into a chap by the name of Kenneth. Kenneth lived just below the mansion and indeed his home was closest in the village to the Proctor mansion. We naturally began talking about the Ghost Story.



Had Kenneth ever seen the Ball of Fire trying to enter the Grave Yard? - we asked. Of course he had - "numerous times". Our imagines went wild.



Just as we were approaching a wooden bridge - that crossed a small creek - that then led to Yonge Street, a man jumped out from under it and headed directly for the Proctor Mansion. Well you can imagine. We had scared ourselves quite enough before this happening - now with it - we screamed bloody murder and raced to the safety of Eric's home.



An unforgettable moment they say.



Now let's flash further ahead.



I am grown and once again living in Brighton and decide one day to take my 3 children to the Proctor House which has now become a museum.



Of course I tell them first about the Ghost - to get them in the right frame of mind.



A pleasant middle age woman greets us at the door and then accompanies us around the house pointing out various things of interest. Of interest to her that is. My children and I are only thinking about one thing - the Ghost in the Basement.



After she concludes the tour she asks if we have any questions. Only one I blurt out - "would it be possible for us to go down in the basement"?



"Whatever for" she replied. "There is nothing down there except the gardener's tools".



Nonetheless, I prevail upon her to let us see the basement telling her, in my pitch, about the John Proctor Ghost. She looked at me as if I had two heads - obviously the woman is a transplant from Toronto.



Anyway - we creep down the olde wooden stairs - and the lady was right - no Ghost, only a bunch of rakes and shovels.



How disappointing.


"Galagher"

p.s. During public school, I delivered the Globe and Mail and one of my customers was Stella Proctor - the last of the Proctors. During the summer months, Ms. Proctor lived in the olde Mansion with a woman companion who served as her aide. Years later, my wife was the head nurse at a Nursing Home in Trenton, and one of her patients was a 105 year old by the name of Amelia. This lady told my wife about the wondrous Balls that the Proctor family held at their mansion, high on Brighton hill, in the late 1800s. I often wonder if, during those glorious Balls, any of the guests took it upon themselves to check out the basement?

The Senate or The Monarchy?

Which should go?




No question - the Senate. It is a waste of money and is just a retirement home for Flaks / Hacks / Ner-do-wells. And oh yes, it is undemocratic. I get a little carried away ...




So what about an Elected Senate?




It would only succeed in adding another layer to an already slow and bureaucratic legislative process. Better to spend the money on House Committees to make them effective and to provide the ordinary MP with some real power.




I have heard it said that we need a Senate because the USA has a Senate to protect their States (read Provinces). But America does not have our British North America which protects the Provinces through a division of power with the Federal Government.




And as for Sober Second Thought - I have yet to see it happen. Perhaps it's due to the 'Sober' requirement?




The sooner the Senate goes - the better. Indeed, I would like to see Stephen Harper include its abolishment as part of his next Election Platform.





So what about the Monarchy? Should it go too?




No.




Can you imagine a President Jean Chretien? I shudder.




With the Monarchy, we here in Canada have something very special - dating back to the year 924 A.D..




Once it is gone - it is gone forever and Canadians will be the poorer for it. That said, I am not optimistic about its future given that many Canadians are either apathetic to the Monarchy or outright antagonistic.

They do not stop to consider what its replacement would be.

Simply stated, it would consist of more politicians which in turn would mean more partisan politics.

The value of the Monarchy is that it is above Politics and as such is unbiased. This can be of great value in times of trouble.

Think back to the Prorogation crisis of last year. Although I disagreed with the Governor General's decision, I respected it for the reasons noted above.

Also think back to the Second World War when Britian was all but defeated. Who did the populace look to before Winston Churchill came officially on the scene. It was the King, whom they rallied around and it was the King whom they were prepared to die for if necessary.

But it wasn't King George the VI - the man; but rather King George the VI the instituiton that rallied the populace.

We have been blessed for many years in having one of the great Monarchs on the Throne - Queen Elizabeth II. I do not suspect that Charles will be so well received but I do have great hope for his son William. But as I have attempted to show above, it really does not matter who occupies the Throne per se, it is the long tradition and history of this institution that makes it special and of value to us all.

Again, I am fearful for the future of the Monarchy here in Canada, but much more fearful of its replacement.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Democracies of the World Unite

The time has come for the Democracies of the World to truly Unite and become a force to be reckoned with.


Why, you ask?


For several reasons, including the fact that the United Nations - like the League of Nations before it - has failed. It has been taken over by a bunch of petty little dictatorships that have as their prime objective the belittling of Western nations and while so doing, to extract as much money from their victims as possible.


The absolute veto given to the five major powers is another major problem. It has resulted in paralysis - especially since two of their number include Russia and China with both out to protect their ruthless proxies from meaningful UN action.


And speaking of China, in a relatively few years hence, it will have the largest economy of any nation: while the United States' importance will continue to decline.

And last, but by no means least, is the growing Islamist threat toward our democratic way of life.

For all of these important reasons, we need an close association of democratic nations to help offset these serious deficiencies and growing threats.


And in fact, there is such an Organization - it is called the 'Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development' or OECD for short.


Its main function is have its member nations cooperate economically amongst themselves to enhance their democratic institutions.

Given the above problems though it needs to do more.

Specifically, the OECD should include mutual defence to its Mission (i.e. an attack against one, is an attack against all).

Moreover, it should admit to its membership any nation that supports Free Elections and the Rule of Law. It should also work closely with those nations interested in becoming democracies.

But it will quickly have to grow and assume greater importance. Currently only 30 countries make up the membership of the OECD which started life back in 1961.

It will also reqire a name change - how about: The Alliance For Democratic Nations or The AllIANCE for short?

For the past several hundred years the world has had the luxury of relying upon one of its numbers - first Great Britain and more lately, the United States - to ensure a semblance of stability in world affairs - i.e. a world cop.

This era is coming to a close and no other democratic nation stands ready to assume the mantel. From here on in, strength will have to come from numbers and the protection of our way of life will be a collective responsibility - as it should be.

I can see a day, even in my lifetime, when non-democratic countries will be knocking at the door of THE ALLIANCE begging to be taken into a life of freedom and prosperity.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Canada's Incarceration Rate is Too High

But not nearly as bad as that of the United States.


We here in Canada have an incarceration rate of approximately 110 inmates per 100,000 population which pales in comparison with that of the United States which tops 1000 per 100,000. In fact, America's rate is the highest in the world - even higher than Red China.


But Canada's is too high as well.


That brings me to our Tory Government.


It wants to be tough on crime - which I am all for - as long as our incarceration rate declines.


An Oxymoron? No.


We need to find ways of punishment that do not entail imprisonment. And of course, this applies to the United States tenfold.


I speak with some authority as I have spent time in jail myself. Permit me to explain.


As a law student, our Criminology Class toured many of the penitentiaries in southern Ontario and as a Queen's student, many of those prisons were located right there in our home town.


But, I digress.


From my perspective, the only persons who should be incarcerated are those who are guilty of committing or planning violent crimes - including those who possess guns during the commission of a crime.


Let me try to be more specific. In my estimation the types of crime that warrant imprisonment are: murder; rape; kidnapping; terriorism; robbery; assault; traffickers; and serious damage to property (e.g. arson).


Pedophiles are sick people and should be confined to mental asylums for life or until they are so old or infirm that they cease to be a threat to our kids.


But for the rest, the druggies (users), thieves, embezzlers, fraudsters etc etc - alternative punishments need to be employed.


Punishments such as fines, house arrest, confiscation of property, black listing (e.g. no longer hold public or private office), and community service should be imposed. And, jail - only as a last resort.


In a nut shell, prisons should be used to protect the public from physical violence or serious damage to their property. Prisons are too costly, and really function as crime schools. The fewer housed in these facilities - the better for the public.


Now back to the Tories.

They have passed and are in the process of passing additional legislation that toughens the criminal code: lengthier terms; more minimum sentences; less generous parole provisions.

And that's okay for the violent offender.

But it is not okay for the non-violent offender. Find another way to punish him or her. Place a permanent tattoo on their foreheads if you want - but don't put them in jail.

I will end with a true case example - Conrad Black.

You will know that I am opposed to the punishment handed out to Black.

Here is a more appropriate penalty: surrender of his Title; confiscation of his many properties and wealth; and a life long ban on owning or holding office in any company - either public and private.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

It Never Fails ...at the Big Z

Time for something lighter ...

I avoid Zellers like the plague, but inevitably I get drawn back there for something of great importance...like yesterday, - to buy Anne some much needed wool. (Anne with the broken foot - a story for another time)

I know going in, that whatever check-out line I pick will end up being the wrong one and I was not to be disappointed.

Finding the product of my search is not a problem for me. Hasn't been for years, since the first thing I do upon entering a department store - or similar type 'box' store, is seek out a sales clerk - sorry, an Associate, to act as my proxy in finding the object of my adventure out. Anne would spend a lifetime looking herself but again, that is another story...

Anyway, the real problem for me - and always has been - is finding a way to quickly pay for the items of my quest and speedily be on my way.

As per usual, I carefully surveyed the half dozen lines with 'open' lights on and decided that my best bet was the one most closest to me, as it contained the least number of shoppers. In reality, I knew that I was only kidding myself because I have tried this approach on countless other occasions to no avail.

I was fourth in line, feeling a bit silly with my one ball of wool. In actual fact, it was not a ball but a small oblong shaped pink bundle of yarn. Anyway, back to the line - the first two patrons sailed through without issue- they always do. Then the clerk served the 3rd customer, you know the one directly ahead of me.


The woman had but 4 items - all Halloween in nature. Three packages consisting of false eye lashes, false finger nails, and some wicked type of makeup. The fourth and final item was the traditional, conical, witch's black hat.


Now I am thinking to myself maybe I have been worrying for nought. How long can it take to ring through 4 rather small items albeit unusual ones. In fact, the transaction went without incident. The clerk quickly scanned the 4 horror items through and presented the lady with her very modest bill. The women reached into her purse and started to pull out a twenty dollar bill in payment and then .....she stopped.


She looked at her bill and queried the price. Hadn't she seen signs indicating 40% off rather than the lousy 25% she'd been given?


The clerk went to the handy sales bill on top of her counter and flipped quickly to the Halloween items and showed the lady that 25% was precisely what she was entitled to.


"But the signs said 40%", the woman wailed.

The clerk, to her credit, kept her calm - they always do and I have to think that that is half the problem. Maybe if they'd give these customers the gears from time to time it would help put this petty-type nonsense to rest. I digress.


The clerk then picked up her phone and called the suspect department blasting out for all and sundry to hear that a price check was needed.

We all waited. By this time my line had grown by an additional 4 or 5 others.

Five minutes lapsed and nothing. We all stood there looking at the phone.

Another call went out and another non-reply. More time having elapsed.

And me with my ball - or oblong of pink wool.

I was beginning to think 'horror' thoughts of my own.

Anyway - back to the line, which now was shrinking as those behind me skirted off to other lines. I laughed to myself thinking it served them right for lining up behind me in the first place. They should have known better.

Finally, a manager approached to hear the woman's sad tale of 25% rather than 40% reduction for these modestly priced novelties and the clerk explained the trouble she was having in getting through to the delinquent department.

The manager made a decision, as managers are apt to do. Not the one I was hoping for mind you - that being to give the lady the lousy 40%. No could do, since it would probably amount to the princely sum of a couple of dollars. Heck all they had to do was ask me and I'd have gladly paid it over for her.

No the manager decided that she personally would go and do the price check herself. How noble of her.

In the stores of my upbringing this would be no big deal but in these modern box stores it can amount to a great deal of lost time and energy.

Off she cheerfully went into the bowels of the building.

We all stood transfixed on the phone. And waited.

Finally a ring - and an answer and a response.


The signs advertising 40% related to products other than Halloween items. Case Closed.


The customer was so apologetic, I even began to feel sorry for her.

I even asked her if the costume was for her or a child.

She sheepishly admitted it was for her.

She'll make a great witch.


As I see it..

"Galagher"

p.s. From a book by Walter Mosley: "A life worth remembering is hell to live".

It Makes Eminent Sense

Keep in mind as a Libertarian, the smaller the government, the better.

The Province of Ontario recently announced that it is considering giving its Police the power to arbitrarily stop motorists in their never ending search for drunk drivers.

It makes eminent sense, given the carnage that drunk drivers have caused to themselves and more importantly, to their innocent pax and to other vehicle occupants.

It is hard to imagine but there was a time, in the not too distant past, when drunk driving was "cool". Police turned a blind eye or if the driver was especially blitzed, they would chauffeur him home.

Then they started to stop drivers who evidenced erractic driving and put them through a series of physical tests to help determine the issue of sobriety.

Then came .08 testing and the road blocks (the ride program). So for the first time - everyone was inconvenienced and could be pulled over for no apparent reason other than they might have been drinking to excess. Even though a relatively small per centage of drivers would fall into that category.

Then came .05 and the 24 hour suspensions. Now even those who enjoyed a glass of wine at dinner could lose their driving privelges and presumably their triple A insurance rating irrespective of the fact that they did not pose a danger on the road.

So back to my premise as a Libertarian - big governments get Bigger and BIGGER - if left unchecked.

So now we are to give the Police the power to stop on the highways anyone they wish, for no visible reason whatsoever. Again, despite the fact that the vast majority of drivers are responsible and do not drive while under the influence.

In a Free and Democratic State - which Canada in theory more and more only professes to be - one of the fundamental freedoms of its citizens is to be free from arbitrary search and seizure. With this new proposal, what comes to mind are the old pictures on television of Nazis police stopping innocent citizens on the street and demanding to see their identity papers.

The difference between our current situation and the Nazis approach is one of degree only. And, as time passes, that difference is getting more difficult to discern.

What is becoming ever more apparent is that the basic freedoms of the Majority are being sacrificed in governments' attempt to control the actions of a few.

Yes it is an excellent idea that police be given the power to stop whomever they wish, wherever they like in their ongoing efforts to reduce the deaths and injuries caused by drunk driving.

These ideas are always excellent - they make good sense and each one leads to an even better idea but down a very slippery slope.

For the sake of Democracy and its core freedoms, these ideas too often strike at the very heart of what we are all about.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

ISRAEL...Had Two Friends..

Now there is but one.


Since the Election of Stephen Harper and prior to the Election of Barack Obama, Israel could count on only Canada and the US to defend its interest across the world.


With Obama's victory, it can now only count on Canada.


Obama has turned America away from Israel for two major reasons; first, his naive belief that he can successfully negotiate with their heretofore enemies and second, due to the America's left natural symapathy for all things Palistinian.


Sadly, there may be another factor at play. The Black community in the United States has a pronounced anti-Semitic streak. One would have to think, given Obama's background of life and work on the south side of Chicago, he could not have escaped some of that negative sentiment.


Regardless, for Israel, it could not have come at a worse time.

UN resolutions denouncing Israel are becoming more frequent and more vitrolic.


More important though, it comes at a time when Israel's main enemy, Iran, is on record as saying it intends to obliterate them from from the face of the earth and at a time when Iran has or is about to have the nuclear wherewithal to do just that.

There is really nothing Canada can do to stop it - other than to continue to speak out. Israel must continue to hope that in the final analysis, the USA will be by its side. But, given the above, they must be having serious doubt.

Israel is a very small nation, both real estate and population wise. Its population of less than 8 million people is even slightly less than the number of Palistinians, The country itself is a small sliver of land that borders on the Mediterranian and is surrounded by Arab Countries. Egypt alone - a bordering neighbour - has well over 80 million inhabitants.

It is also the only democratic nation in a sea of dictatorships. Talk about isolated and surrounded!!

And yet, Israel continues to be a beacon to the world on what it continues to accomplish in such a foreboding environment.

In his dying days of office, I fully expected that George W. Bush would have worked with Israel to smash Iran's nuclear capability. Why he did not - is a mystery. Even his VP - is on record as saying he tried to convince his boss to take that step. Perhaps Bush was simply tired with all the outrage that continued to come his way for trying to do the right thing for the world. In that regard, who could blame him.

But he left the issue undone. And now with Obama in place, is it looking less likely that anything will be done by the States.

It comes down to Israelis themselves. If they do bomb Iran - they are damned. If they don't bomb Iran, they risk being obliterated.

What would we in Canada do if faced with the same situation?

I leave it to each of you to decide in your own way.

"Galagher"







Israel is a light on a sea of darkness. With only ?

From Out of the West ...once again.

Alberta has a new Party - the Wild Rose Party and I predict it will win the next provincial election over the hapless governing Tories. Whether it morphs into a federal movement after that remains to be seen, but I sure hope it does just that.

New political parties are not unusal for Alberta, as the recent Reform Party can attest. There have been many others before that, including the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) which today is known as the NDP and the Social Credit Party founded in 1935 and headed by 'Bible Bill' Aberhart.

The Wild Rose is disappointed with the Tories since they have squandered billions of dollars in Canada's richest province and today it runs a deficit. In many respects, the Tories of Alberta mirror their counterparts in Ottawa: Big Spending; Big Government; and Big Deficits / Debt.

The Wild Rose Party is the only Party in Canada that can lay claim to Libertarian status.

Albertans are a proud people. They have not been co-opted into socialist thinking - and thereby do not expect the government to provide them with cradle to grave coverage. They alone, in Canada, have retained the independence that is so evident outside the major cities of the United States. An independence that I believe is needed for peoples to excel.

For decades, Alberta money has siphoned off and been used to fund Canada's have-not Provinces in the East. This has allowed those provinces to become comfortable with UI, Welfare, Transfers, etc - a life-style based upon the hard work and ingenuity of others.

We in Canada, have to stop the never ending growth of government where more and more of our freedoms are eroded and more of our earnings taxed away.

Perhaps the Wild Rose Party will spark something in us all to caste off the suffocating cloak of Big Brother.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Something Happened in the 1960s

Note: In thinking it over, I do not believe I gave this topic its proper due. I will come back to it at a future date with a rewrite. G.

And it wasn't for the best..

I was watching a fellow Libertarian last week on T.V. - Glen Beck, and he made the following statement:

"Wouldn't it be great if we could turn life back to the way it was when we were growing up".

He went on to note that it was not a perfect time - but it was a much better time than the one we experience today.

I can vividly recall the late 50s and early 60s; it was a comfortable and safe time to live. We seemed to know who we were and what was expected of us. We were part of a common community where God was Supreme, we had respect for our politicians and the Queen ruled over the Common Wealth.

We respected our teachers and our parents, and we held girls in awe.

Then along came the Beatles, the Twist and the music got louder with heavy metal and and more focus on a growing drug culture. Young people turned on to drugs and turned off life. The Rules that had governed society for a century and more had changed forever.

The Boomers came of Age during this time and with their self focus came an end to community and to respect. Life pre-drugs was to be distained and the values that had attached to it fell to the wayside.

There are winners during these last 50 years including Women and Blacks. Women, thanks in large part to the pill, are now equal to men in the workplace, but in return they have had to give up their specialness. There are other costs including the damage to children left to fend for themselves as both parents worked.

Blacks have also made dramatic gains since the mid 1960s. The Civil Rights legislation of 1964-65 helped to materially end discrimination that had gone on for 150 years and more. But even for the Blacks the gains have not been wide spread. Ghettos are still prevalent - fueled by welfare and crime, black education continues to be inferior and their unemployment levels are much too high as is their single mother rates.

In addition, Obama's election has shown that the level of animosity on the part of Blacks toward Whites is surprisingly high. Far higher than is the reverse.

Collectively, we need to restore our pre-1960s sense of community. We need to recover our lost values and to regain respect for our parents and, indeed, for our fellow man.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

THE BURKA

I have been meaning for some time now to deal with the Burka and now that it is back in the news of late, it is probably timely to do just that.

As a Libertarian, you can no doubt imagine that basically I have no difficulty with a mature woman wearing a Burka, if that is what she wishes to do. It is her decision and in most cases she is not hurting anyone but herself by so wearing one. Ergo - let her go to it.

I can hear your comments as I write - i.e. 'but it isn't her decision - rather it is her husband's or father's decision and she is simply knuckling under to male authority'.

Perhaps.

But I think it is dangerous to assume the motives behind one's actions. Moreover, even if it is the case that she is being forced to wear such archaic garb, it is up to the woman herself and women generally in similar circumstance to rise up against this supposed religious custom.

Indeed, there are more and more instances reported where Muslim women are doing just that - both here in the modern word and more importantly, in their old countries.

It took the Suffragettes to secure the right to vote for women and it will take the muslim women to caste off their cloaks of submission and male domination.

That is not to say I believe the Burka can be used to hide behind in every instance. The following are some of the times when the veil must be lifted:

• Photo Id for drivers' licences, health cards, and proof of citizenship for voting.

In addition, French President Sarkozy was correct when he banned the Burka from French schools. There is no way our teachers should be expected to teach a child when all they see is two eyes peering out at them.

In fact, I would outlaw Burkas for children generally since they are not of age to give consent. An adult woman is quite another matter, as I have noted above.

Should an adult woman though decide the Burka is not for her, our society must come to her aid and protect her from retribution.

I truly believe, if we as a society stick to the above approach, the days of the Burka are numbered, both here and around the world.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Her Majesty the Governor General

I have received some e-mails wondering if I was on holidays - I was not, but did take a little break over Thanksgiving. Now back to Blogging - there are so many topics to deal with.

Today, our GG.

When first appointed, I was dumbfounded that our then Prime Minister would appoint someone with so little ties to this country. Plus the one tie she did have, was to Separatism. Perhaps this was not so surprising given that he is the leading candidate for the worst PM in modern Canadian history. (More on this later)

It is not that I am down on immigrants since indeed we are all products of immigration, including our Aboriginals.

The reason I was so opposed the appointment was due to the fact that Madame Jean was not steeped in our Democratic Monarchy. To me, it was like appointing an orderly to do brain surgery.

Her first major test took place when Harper came to her for permission to prorogue Parliament. She erred in allowing him to do so. It was blatantly apparent to everyone that he had lost the confidence of the House and was using Prorogation solely to avoid losing a Non-Confidence Vote. He should not have been allowed to do so.

It is a testament to the public's high esteem for the Office of the Governor General that it could survive such a blunder. Ironically, it also reinforced the continued need for this Office.

This was followed by numerous trips here in Canada and around the world. The domestic trips were in order and in fact, well received. As the Queen's representative, here in Canada, the need for her to fly around on foreign junkets though was lacking. It culminated when she tried to upstage the Queen at the D-Day ceremonies in France. She should have known better but given her lack of background perhaps it was not surprising.

More recently, she has proclaimed herself to be Canada's Head of State despite the fact that even a cursory knowledge of our Constitution would dispell that belief. Plus hopefully the lady would have advisors who, unlike herself, would know better.

There is therefore nothing innocent in her attempt to accede this status unto herself.

We are governed by symbols and tradition as much as we are by Acts and Regulations. Indeed, there is a good argument to be made that the former trumps the latter - especially in times of crisis. To have a novice, albeit a very pretty one, hold such a critical and sensitive position has negative ramifications for us all.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

P.S. More test results in - they favour the Libertarian approach.

Speaking of Smoking...

Did you hear on the news last eve that a trucker, here in Ontario, has been fined $150 for smoking in his own truck? What nonsense.

The rationale put forward by big government (add intrusive) is that the truck is his "work place" and hence, he is forbidden to smoke in it. From what I know about big trucks is that they are also the trucker's home when on the road.

This is just one example, among countless, of governments invading the privacy of individuals when those governments get too big for their britches.

The other day I was walking past the local Legion when I noticed 4 - 5 older legionaires sitting on the main steps smoking. I took a moment and went up to them to commisserate on the fact that as veterans they are not even entitled to smoke in their own private club.

They agreed with me but voiced the opinion that there really isn't anything that they could do to change it. I didn't disagree, but told them that in my opinion the Royal Canadian Legion had let them down by not negotiating an exemption for Canada's veterans. They nodded their agreement and went on puffing away.

In the case of our veterans you have a history of our government handing our free cigarettes to our troops during war time and then making them available at very favourable prices throughtout their military service generally. Then when they are older and good and hooked on the weed, they make it illegal for them to enjoy a smoke in the comfort of their own premises. How low can one go?

And it is not due to the deleterious affect of second- hand smoke. Smoking rooms can now easily be equipped with proper ventilation. Rather it is once again due to Big Brother Government believing it knows best for its children - I mean citizens.

I remember at the start of the government's campaign to target smokers telling my wife Anne that the day will come when Big Macs will also come within their sights. I really thought to myself, it quite unlikely - but the day did come.

In my mind, it all started with seat belts and it has been down hill from that time forward.

More lately, government is looking to regulate the amount of salt in our diets. We'll soon have the Salt Police. Here in Ottawa, we are prohibited from cutting trees on our own property without a permit - a permit that requires an arborist's report. Herbicides to control weeds on our own lands are forbidden. Vasts tracts of property can be rendered worthless by various environmental designations with the land owner receiving no compensation but still expected to pay realty taxes on the useless property. The list goes on and on.

What will they target next? Alcohol? Probably. But when that's accomplished, there will be something else and then something else again.

This is all being done in the guise of Big Government protecting you, the helpless individual.

We have all heard of the 'bubble child" - the child who has so many allergies that he or she cannot leave their homes without being wrapped in some protective bubble. If we do not start to push back soon, the day will come when we all will be placed in bubbles by our government for our own protection of course.

A novel thought to leave you with - who is better placed to protect you, than you yourself.

As I see it.

"Galagher"