Another Earth Hour Has Come And Gone... But Did Anyone Notice?

This past Saturday night, many participated in Earth Hour. For one hour a year, so called "progressives" turn back the clock 200 years and turn off their lights for an hour in name of fighting climate change. I love pointing out on twitter every year that it's ALWAYS Earth Hour in North Korea

North Korea... Where it's #EarthHour ALL THE TIME! pic.twitter.com/t9CsDjtYWi

— Political Paradox (@PoliParadox) March 26, 2017

Is it me or does this event become more of a non-event every year? Earth Hour started in Sydney Australia in 2007 and went international the following year. As I recall, in the days leading up the the big day, there was quite a bit of media coverage in those first few years but as each year passed, the coverage seemed to dwindle. This past Saturday I didn't even know about it until it was mentioned on my local newscast Saturday morning.

Not that I participate in Earth Hour or anything. Quite frankly, it's a huge waste of time. Just another example of what I call "SLACKtivism". Those people who think changing a Facebook picture after a terrorist attack or putting some inspirational quote in their e-mail signature somehow changes the world. Of course, nothing really gets achieved. Forget the fact that burning a candle is far worse for the planet than burning a light bulb.

As each year passes, statistics on how much power was reduced seems to be harder to come by. The only province where stats are readily reported on is British Columbia. Reports from Toronto suggest this year's earth hour may have been the worst ever. A newspaper in the Niagara area suggested people participated this year however they failed to compare it to previous years. Last year, media in my city were all too eager to hype up earth hour ahead of time but failed to report on how we did after the fact. So I decided to tweet my local power company on numbers locally here in Kitchener and they got back to me about 12 hours later. What? No one in the local media could have bothered to do that? I'm not a reporter... I'm a nobody and they easily got me the answer I wanted. The reality is, the media rarely report on anything unless someone bothers to send them a press release. You know earth hour is getting really bad when even the media doesn't seem to care anymore.

Politicians Missing a Huge Opportunity To Reach Young Voters

By now you may have heard about this news story over the weekend where a VICE news reporter was denied an opportunity to ask Stephen Harper a question during a campaign stop in eastern Ontario. If you haven't heard, take a look... it's a good read. And this coming from someone who doesn't always read an entire news article before he gets bored.

Here's a brief synopsis:

We all know about Stephen Harper's policy of only taking 5 questions from the media during his election campaign stops. Well, during a campaign stop in Ontario this weekend, VICE news reporter Justin Ling noticed there were only 4 other reporters present. Justin asked Harper's media people to inquire if he could have that 5th question. Long story short... Harper only took 4 questions. As it turns out, the 5 questions aren't just random pickings. 1 question is reserved for local media (who are only permitted to ask a local question) and the other 4 questions go to established traditional media outlets. So if you're an independent reporter or work for a smaller news organization like VICE... you're out of luck. But here's the kicker... those established media outlets have paid to be on the Harper bus.. $3,000 a day (or about $78,000 for the whole campaign). So in other words... reporters have PAID to be there. Justin only wanted to ask a question about foreign policy. Instead, he was passed over in favour of the established reporters who only seem to ask about the Mike Duffy trial these days.

Money talks I guess. I hope I'm not the only one deeply concerned here. Furthermore, what does it say about our established media that it took a smaller media outlet for this dirty secret to come out? Clearly, this has been going on for quite some time and the mainstream news outlets have gladly and quietly ponied up the cash. Apparently, only the Conservatives require a cover charge to gain elite access to their campaign bus. But just as bothersome, is the fact that smaller news outlets and bloggers are being shut out completely. A huge opportunity is being missed here, many young people get their news exclusively from online news sources like VICE. If politicians and their political parties want to reach younger voters their attitude has to change.

But, there's a little epilogue to this tail. NDP leader Tom Mulcair has been criticized this campaign for often taking NO questions at all. Mulcair was campaigning in Kitchener yesterday and stoped by a local radio talk show. He was asked about Harper's lack of transparency and being closed off to the media. As expected, Mulcair ripped into Harper, despite the fact that he failed to take any listener questions during his scheduled 25 minute interview. I say 'scheduled' because the NDP leader showed up late! And then proceeded to leave early, leaving the talk show host an extra 3 minutes to fill until the commercial break. I find it hilarious that Tom Mulcair had the nerve to attack Harper calling him "Arrogant" yet he himself showed up late... left early... and didn't take any phone calls from the public.

Now, I'm not defending Harper. The way he's treating the media during this campaign is disgusting. But really, this seems to be an indication that all these guys are exactly the same. Politicians will NEVER put your interests ahead of their own. All of this talk about voting for 'change' is really just a smoke an mirrors show. For small c Conservatives like myself, there really is no mainstream option for smaller government anymore... assuming there actually was to begin with.

The "Power Wall" Smoking Ban Has Failed

On Friday night, I took a quick trip to my local convenience store to buy the winning ticket for this week's Lotto Max draw. I think they gave me the wrong ticket, as it turns out, they sold mine to someone in Owen Sound. Oh well... maybe next time. While I was waiting in line I looked up at that blank wall behind the cashier, for behind that wall I knew were cigarettes. Now, I don't smoke and I never have but I think everyone knows what is behind there. They are called "Power Walls" and they are illegal in Ontario.

In may of 2008, the province of Ontario along with many other provinces banned the display of cigarettes in convenience stores. I'm going to show you a picture here, something as rare as a sighing of the Yeti, something which hasn't been seen in almost 6.5 years.. .something which is illegal:

 

There... I did it, let's see if I can write the rest of this article without being jailed.

So, as I'm standing there in line, I got to thinking... I wonder if the power wall ban has been effective in reducing smoking? If you are a regular reader of this blog or a listener to my podcast, you'll know what my immediate suspicions are... not at all... and I WAS RIGHT! A report out last year shows no change in the smoking trend of Ontarians.

The report was produced by the Propel Centre For Population Health Impact at the University of Waterloo and appeared on a number of websites. I found it at the website of the Manitoba Tobacco Reduction Alliance (If you'd like to read the whole report, click HERE.). In the report, appeared the following chart:

 

As you can see, the number of daily smokers has remained pretty steady, even after the power wall ban came into effect in 2008. Here is that chart in a different form:

For some reason there was a big up trend in 2012, I didn't look deep enough in the report to see if there might be a reason for this. Now, it appears that "Smoking Prevalence" (which basically includes occasional smokers as well) is down. However, the trend was going down even before convenience stores were forced to cover up:

Of course, I'm sure some will claim some sort of victory with this final stat claiming that numbers are down since 2008. Government jumps in front of a parade, then pretends to be leading the parade.

So in conclusion... what has happened? Lots of money was spent putting this plan in place and there has been no impact or reduction in smoking levels. The "out of sight, out of mind" mentality clearly has not worked here in Ontario. Let's let retailers again be allowed to display the products they have for sale.

Libertarianism 101

This week's podcast episode was titled "Libertarianism 101". I wanted to clarify some basic libertarian positions that I passively make reference to that may confuse some people. We covered 4 areas... Click HERE to listen to the full 30 minute episode.

Here is a summary:

Government Regulation

Typical Thought: We need government regulation to clamp down on big business. Without government regulation, the consumers will be abused, prices will be sky high and we'd be drinking orange juice laced with bleach.

If you really think about it, government regulations are kind of redundant. In a free and open marketplace, Businesses will take it among themselves to make sure products are safe and offered at a competitive price. Otherwise, they'd be out of business.

What about drugs? Many think that the FDA and Health Canada need to keep unproven drugs off the market. But no one thinks of it the other way. What about people who die while waiting for drugs to be approved? There is tremendous evidence to suggest government has killed more people withholding drugs from the market than it ever has releasing a drug too early.

Conclusion: Government regulation often has the opposite effect to what was originally intended. And any well meaning company would take it among themselves to make sure standards are met. Otherwise... you'd be out of business.

Monopoly

Typical Thought: We need government regulation to oversee big business... otherwise Wal-Mart would run everything.

We hear about monopolies all the time but in reality, it have never occurred in the history of north America. In fact, the only REAL monopolies occur with government ie. Alcohol sales, Healthcare, Heating and Hydro. All competition is outlawed in these areas... THAT is a true monopoly.

Conclusion: The word "Monopoly" is over used, and the only REAL monopolies in society occur within government.

 Capitalism

Typical Thought: Capitalism is bad. Only government oversight can prevent big business from abusing their power.

People THINK we live in a capitalist country... but we don't. The fact is, most government policy favours big business over little business. Business and government work very closely together. All you have to do is look at the biggest donors to the main political parties to know what's really going on.

Conclusion: We don't actually live in a country that practices Capitalism. What we THINK is capitalism, is actually crony capitalism brought on by bad government policy.

Government Spending

Typical Thought: Government is essential to keep the economy moving, invest in our future and create jobs to ensure the economy stays strong.

Because government doesn't have any of it's own money. By default, every dollar that government spends, is a dollar NOT spent some place else. Some people disagree with this claiming that the "Multiplier Effect" has a positive effect on the economy. However, it is debatable whether or not the multiplier effect actually exists.

Conclusion: Government doesn't actually create jobs. The best it can do is move a job from one location to another.

Oh, How The Wind Blows

Remember that really windy day we had last week (November 24th)? What a great day that must have been for wind energy huh? Yeah, about that... it wasn't.

Last Monday was one of the windiest days in recent memory and oh boy were Ontario's wind turbines moving. The problem was, they were producing way more power than was needed. This over excess of power ended up costing Ontario taxpayers $10 Million for just that one day.

According to Wind Concerns Ontario, the province generated over 45,000 megawatt hours of electricity that day. Because we didn't need that electricity, we ended up exporting 20,000 of that it to Quebec, Michigan and New York state. But we sold it off at a LOSS, just over $11 per megawatt hour. To put that in perspective, all that wind produced power is worth, $135/MWh... that's a boatload of money lost.

The problem with wind power is the wind blows mainly at night, but a majority of energy demand is during the day. So, power is being produced at a time when it's not needed. Because of this, power is sold off to neighbouring provinces or even nearby american states at bargain bin prices. To make up for this loss, prices during the day are artificially high. So, we are paying extra high electricity prices during the day, to make up for the power we're not using at night.

Once power is on the grid, it has to go somewhere. As of now, it's very difficult to store power for use later. The only method I'm aware of involves large tanks of compressed air underground. This of course is not cheap and sounds very unsafe. Talk about a disaster waiting to happen.

The wind is certainly blowing with Green energy. A report in the Globe and Mail this week suggested that Green energy jobs have eclipsed jobs in the oil industry. Do you know one person working in the green energy industry?... I don't. It's easy to proclaim something a success when it's subsidized at the expense of everyone else. The green energy industry only exists because of millions in government bailouts handed out every year.

The Political Paradox Podcast!

That's right, this blog now has an extra dimension to it. We've launched our very own Podcast. We'll be on every other Tuesday talking about current news stories from Canada and around the world.

As of now, we have two episodes for you to chew on.Just click the podcast link on the top menu bar and enjoy.

We've just submitted our show to iTunes. Within a few days, we should be listed under "News & Politics"

To learn how to subscribe, click HERE.

To listen to past shows click HERE.

Ewwww, Look At What School Kids Are Eating For Lunch

It's currently one of the hottest trends on twitter. The #ThanksMichelleObama hashtag chronicles some of the interesting and at times, disgusting lunches kids are getting in their school cafeteria's.

It's part of the USDA's (US Department of Agriculture) new healthy eating guidelines headed by the first lady who has made it her mission to tackle obesity in children.

A USDA spokesperson told buzzfeed the students tweets"do not fully reflect the full range of choices students are provided."

Alas, here are some of our favourites:

This is supposed to be a grill cheese sandwich:

Yummy school lunch grilled cheese #ThanksMichelleObama pic.twitter.com/zliTnsPSMS
— lakota™ (@lakotatbh) November 24, 2014

This is just wrong:

"@HouseCracka: This should be a crime. Its a school lunch! #ThanksMichelleObama pic.twitter.com/BXw4VidvgP" 😂😂😂😂
— Ethel's Grandson (@Poppa_Diop) November 24, 2014

This cheese has mold on it:

Moldy food #thanksmichelleobama pic.twitter.com/QcDMO8zb6B
— Genevieve Galligan (@genniegalligan) November 24, 2014

I have no idea what this is supposed to be:

Students post gross school lunch pictures using #ThanksMichelleObama hashtag http://t.co/g5LZQTGEdX pic.twitter.com/D26AoIEOJs
— FOX 29 (@FOX29philly) November 24, 2014

Sadly, This one looks to be the most appetizing so far:

This was lunch today at my sons grade school. Shoppy Joe, green beans, jello w/3 oranges & milk #ThanksMichelleObama pic.twitter.com/ZH5ImNPo3U
— Lori Ann Dicks-Head (@Oldsmobilelady) September 17, 2014

Heard of "where's the beef"? This one has me asking, "Where's the tuna"? I had to look twice before I saw it:

#ThanksMichelleObama for this mystery meat in school lunches #MysteryTunaTuesday @PhatMatt28 @jared_raley_ pic.twitter.com/uk9jemw8ry
— ⚾KyleGrabill⚾ (@KG_2) April 8, 2014

And finally, can someone tell me what this is please?

my school lunch today #ThanksMichelleObama pic.twitter.com/2jeYlJF0wu
— josh russell (@josh_emerson) November 21, 2014

A Closer Look At Tomorrow's Municipal Election

A Libertarian friend of mine has an online radio show. He has just done done a special episode looking at tomorrow's municipal election as it relates to Waterloo region.

Some good journalism being done here about how many of our currant candidates vying for your vote seem to have changed their tune on certain issues or have conflicts of interest on the LRT issue. Unfortunately the LRT is pretty much a done deal and will be very difficult to stop.

Among the facts he dug up:

•  At Least 4 regional Councillors who voted for a 12.9% tax increase for the LRT project, live in townships that are exempt from the tax increase.
  
  
• Councillor Sean Strickland was quoted in 2010 saying a 9% tax increase for the LRT project was too high only later to vote for the 12.9% increase.
  
  
• Waterloo mayoral candidate Dave MacDonald has said during election debates that as Mayor he would be very transparent and have an open door policy. However he has ignored virtually every media interview request during the campaign.

... And much more. If you live in Waterloo Region, I highly suggest you take a listen to this 37 minute commentary before you vote tomorrow.

Link: http://fauxcapitalist.com/2014/10/26/jason-erbs-informative-and-candid-take-on-the-october-27-2014-waterloo-region-election/

The RCMP Has Some Explaining To Do...

Obviously, yesterdays shooting in Ottawa is a tragic event and all types of questions are being asked. But leave it to the mainstream news media to ask questions EXCEPT the one question that everyone is wondering... How did a gunman get so far into the main parliament building in the first place?

I've been thinking about this Kevin Vickers situation. Mr. Vickers is the one who successfully brought down the gunman at parliament hill yesterday. And today is being hailed as a hero. By taking down the shooter he definitely stooped a terrible tragedy from getting worse and that's of course is a good thing. However... let's not forget that this guy is the head of all security at parliament hill and he should be put on the hot seat about how a gunman was able to advance that far into parliament hill and come within feet of being able to kill mass amounts of people at once.

It's my understanding that the two security guards at the main entrance are unarmed. This seems to be irresponsible to me. Supposedly, the main duty of these officers is to check ID. A little further inside the hill are armed officers in civilian clothes. But even this failed yesterday as one of these undercover officers was shot in the leg while trying to grab the shooters riffle. The shooter continued down the hall getting within feet of where parliamentary meetings were going on. At this point, Mr. Vickers heard the chaos in the hall and grabbed his gun from his desk drawer (which also seems a bit odd to me) and shot the gunman in the hallway.

Government security failed us big time yesterday. If I were the prime minister, there is no way I would trust my well being and security to a government agency. I would hire a private security firm who has a vested interest in making sure I'm safe. Otherwise, they wouldn't have a job. The problem with many Government agencies is they rarely have to answer when they mess up and are rarely held accountable for their actions.  

How much heat is the RCMP going to take for "Being Caught Off Guard"? Government never goes out of business, they just keep on rolling along. If this were a private security company, guaranteed... there would be a different company looking after parliament hill starting today.

Kevin Vickers. Hero?... Maybe. Completely innocent? He'll have to be put on the hot seat to know for sure.

Dirty Politics...

Big story in the Ontario Municipal elections from Kitchener, Ontario. Follow me here, it gets a bit confusing.

A Candidate in Kitchener's Ward 2 (Wasai Rahimi) posted a screenshot last night of an e-mail he recently received from one of Kitchener's mayoral candidates (Dan Glenn-Graham). This e-mail, supposedly written by Glenn-Graham asked Rahimi to step down and declare support for another ward 2 candidate (Dan Graham). I know this is confusing because two of the people named above have very similar names.

In short, a candidate for mayor asked a ward candidate to withdraw from his campaign and endorse one of his competitors. This e-mail claimed that this candidate was "Close to Winning", and that a win for Rahimi is "unlikely". Of course this is a fact that that is virtually impossible to know.

In multiple media interviews this morning, Dan Glenn-Graham claimed that it was in fact a member of his campaign team who sent the e-mail and this team member is no longer with the Glenn-Graham campaign.

And in perhaps the strangest twist of this story, this e-mail was apparently sent on the same day that another candidate for mayor (James Rhodes) mysteriously dropped out of the race without any real explanation. And on his way out the door, who did Rhodes endorse?... Dan Glenn-Graham.

This is supposedly a coincidence, but in the dirty world of politics... anything is possible.

This is one of the main reasons people are disgruntled with politics, lies and dirty games... anything to get elected. And of course, once you are elected, you'll spend most of your time trying to win re-election. Regardless of who sent this e-mail and why, it centrally looks bad on Dan Glenn-Graham. If you can't manage your campaign, how will you be able to manage the 10th largest city in Canada?

I live in Kitchener's Ward 2 and up until today, I was going to leave that section on my ballot blank as I wasn't overly impressed with any of the candidates in my ward, and I won't stand to vote for the lesser of 6 evils. But I may now consider voting for Wasai Rahimi, If he is the anti Dan Glenn-Graham... I'm in.

The REAL Reason Behind The Light Bulb Ban

I really should put Reason Magazine on my browser bookmarks. I almost missed this article about the controversial Light bulb ban.

On January 1st, the Canadian and US governments put into place a ban on 75 and 100 watt traditional light bulbs (the 40 and 60 watt bulbs will be phased out at the end of this year). At first it looked like this was a push by environmental groups to ban traditional light bulbs which were less energy efficient. But now, the secret is out. This light bulb ban has nothing to do with Environmentalism. It was crony Capitalism.

We are now finding out that some of the biggest light bulb manufactures like Philips, Sylvania and General Electric lobbied the government for this. In particular, Phillips paid environmental groups (like the national resources defence council) to pressure the government into banning traditional light bulbs.

Now, why would Philips, Sylvania and GE be in favour of a Light Bulb ban? Because traditional light bulbs don’t have very big profit margins. The Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL’s) are more expensive and most of the time, are made in china. They can make a bigger profit off the CFL’s.

Libertarians are pro business. There is nothing wrong with starting a business, becoming successful and maybe opening up a bunch of locations.  However, when these companies become so large that they have an influence over government policy, that’s when it becomes a problem. Contrary to popular belief, large companies often lobby the government to change regulations to give them an advantage. Regulations that their competitors won’t be able to keep up with or will prevent a new competitor from even starting up in the first place. This is not capitalism, this is crony capitalism. In the case of this bulb ban, Philips and GE were worried about an upstart competitor getting a huge contract with Wal-mart.

This was not about saving energy, saving the planet or sensible environmental policy winning out. Philips and GE knew that people wouldn’t buy the more expensive bulbs so they successfully got them banned. The CFL’s aren’t really that environmentally friendly either. It’s too bad we aren’t free to buy the light bulbs that we want. One of my basic fundamental beliefs is: You should be able to buy whatever you want from whoever wants to sell it to you. Now excuse me… I have to update my browser bookmarks.

Gift Card Fiasco A Lesson For Other Government Areas

Is anybody really surprised that the Ontario Government’s “Free” food gift card program turned into a fiasco? Of course, nothing from the government is every truly “Free”, I wish more people would realize that.

After the Ontario ice storm a couple weeks ago, many people were left without power for days or even over a week for some. I was pretty lucky, my power was only out for about 7 hours. To assist those who had food spoil in their fridge because the long power outage, The Ontario government is distributing $50 and $100 grocery gift cards to those affected 

Maybe I’m insensitive for asking this question: Why didn’t these people put their food outside?? The whole country is a giant freezer right now. As I’m writing this, the wind chill temperature is -36 outside my door. The counter argument to putting food outside is the wild animals are going to get at it. These people could take measures to protect their food like putting it in a cooler or maybe some sealable Tupperware containers. Or even put your recycling box upside down over your food. Plus, how many wild animals are really out at this time of year anyway?

Enter stage right… the Wynne Liberal government who’s plan to assist these people backfired last week. First Kathleen Wynne was filmed personally delivering boxes of food to affected residents. Kathleen Wynne never turns down the opportunity for a photo op does she? And what a coindence, this was in a Toronto riding which is expected to be a very close contest in the provincial election which we all know is right around the corner. Unless she hand delivered packages to everybody in the neighborhood (and you can guarantee she didn't), then this was clearly a photo op.

Then, there weren’t enough gift cards… or so it seemed. How many of the people lining up for these cards were truly in need? There were stories of people getting more than one gift card. And CTV news filmed two women in Toronto getting out of a $50,000 BMW SUV who tried to get cards... luckily they were too late. When things are given away for free, the opportunity is bound to be taken advantage of.

We can apply this gift card fiasco to other areas as well. What about healthcare? Yes, it’s nice going to the emergency room and not worrying about how much the bill is but how many of those people are truly in an emergency situation? Some people go to the emergency room for minor ailments. No wonder the waiting times are so long, there are people who shouldn’t really be there… just like this gift card situation.

Now the government is rolling out the gift card program for other areas of the province. No word yet on exactly how this is going to work. But a news story yesterday suggested that residents will have to have been without power for 48 hours and are in financial need of assistance. I’m not sure how they are going to prove that second point. We’ll have to wait and see I guess.

The Liberal government was really in a "No Wynne" situation. People would have been upset if nothing was done too... damned if you do and damned if you don't. Call Wynne's efforts distasteful, shameless, pandering for votes whatever you want. But the unfortunate reality is any of the big main political party leaders would have done the exact same thing.

What Is A "Monopoly" Anyway?

Today, the competition bureau announced it’s going to look into whether or not google has too much dominance in the marketplace. The word monopoly wasn't actually used in this story but a Google run ‘Monopoly’ is really what is being investigated here.

Too often, people throw around the term “Monopoly” way too often. Progressives who use this word should really look up the definition in the dictionary. The definition of monopoly as given in the dictionary is:

Monopoly
: complete control of the entire supply of goods or of a service in a certain area or market
: a large company that has a monopoly
: complete ownership or control of something

There you have it, a monopoly is when one company or organization has 100% control over a marketplace or industry. However, monopoly is often used in the same sentence as ‘Walmart’ (or insert a big name company here). So if Walmart has a monopoly, then does Target not exist? Does Sears not exist? What about the dollar store? All of these companies are competitors for Walmart. Walmart may be the most successful and have the biggest share of the competitive pie, but by no means do they have a monopoly.

The fact is, monopolies almost never occur in the private sector. Monopolies occur almost exclusively with government. Like here in Ontario with the LCBO. If you want to buy wine or spirits, there is only one game in town, and that game is run by the government. Not only does the government have a monopoly on alcohol, they have outlawed all competition. THAT is a true monopoly. I find it funny that progressives who talk about these (fake) monopolies seem to be ok with government controlling almost every aspect of their lives. Let me tell you something, government will mess with you 100 times more often than any big corporation will.

I find it hilarious when a monopoly (government) investigates what it perceives to be a stranglehold on the marketplace. So much for Harper’s “Free Market Approach” huh?

Ontario "Healthy Schools Strategy" Has Failed

Well, surprise... surprise. Ontario high school students aren't eating at their local cafeteria because the food sucks.

Three years ago, the province of Ontario put in place what they called the "Healthy Schools Strategy". Chocolate bars, burgers and soft drinks were outlawed and replaced with apples, rice and corn in high school cafeteria's.

Ontario's annual Auditor General report was released this week and found in part, sales at High school cafeteria's are down by as much as 45% and vending machine sales are down by as much as 85%. This making it very difficult for Ontario to reach their goal to reduce childhood obesity by 20% in 5 years.

When the government forces people to do things they don't want to do, they go elsewhere. High taxes on tobacco products have forced people to go underground to get their fix. Many people cross boarder shop because prices are cheaper... even when you factor in the price of gas (which is also significantly cheaper in the US). In this case, high school students are ditching their local cafeteria's for fast food options across the street.

When I was in high school, I rarely ate at the cafeteria as I usually brought my lunch from home. Healthy eating starts at home, not with the government telling us what we can and can't eat.

The auditor general's report also found that many cafeteria's aren't even following the healthy eating plan either. Of the three schools tested for this report, some entree's had two times the amount of allowable fat and one dish had 40% more sodium than was supposed to be called for.

In addition to the undesirable options, many students say their local cafeteria menu prices are just too high and the fast food dollar menu across the street is more appealing. I bet the next step is banning fast food establishments near high schools. Sorry... I don't want to give the government bureaucrats any ideas.

The Reform Act: Two Sides To Every Bill

There has been a lot of talk lately about The Reform Act. Last week, Conservative MP Michael Chong put forth a motion which would give more power to your local MP. It sounds like a good idea on the surface but as with most things in life, there are two sides to every story.

There are things about this bill that are good, like allowing a party's local riding association to pick their own candidate. Too many times these days, your local election candidate could be a parachute candidate. The leader of the party will pick high profile candidates and put them in ridings they know they can win, even if that riding is 1000's of miles away from where that person lives. I personally believe that a candidate should live in the riding they are running in. This is an issue that people care about, the 'where do you live' question seems to come up in most debates I watch. The whole parachute thing is dishonest politics, this is exactly how Green Party leader Elizabeth May got elected in 2011.

So there is definitely some good stuff in this bill. But... has anybody seen they part where only 15% of caucus MP's can overthrow their leader?  This concerns me. Take the Liberals for example, the federal Liberals have 36 seats in the house of commons right now. So this would mean if 5 MP's don't like him, he can be kicked out? 81, 000 card carrying liberals voted for Justin Tredeau earlier this year at the leadership convention and if only 5 people don't like him, those vote will be null and void?

But wait there's more, party MP's will have the power to choose the replacement. And this vote occurs in secret and with only 50% + 1 of the vote, a new leader is voted in. And it's not mandatory that every MP attends the meeting either. So in theory, a new leader could be voted in by literally a hand full of people as well. And this is supposed to be more democratic? If you are a card carrying member of a political party, you should think twice about supporting this bill.

There are two sides to every story. Whenever you hear about a piece of legislation, especially something you think is going to benefit the voting public, ask yourself this question: What is in it for the person (or people) proposing the bill? Everything government does by its very nature is political. Politicians will rarely do anything that benefits the people, everything they do is ultimately for their own political gain. In this case, it's a few back bench MP's who don't see eye to eye with Stephen Harper and they want to overthrow him. Sure, Michael Chong says this won't come into effect until the next election in 2015 but he could very well get re-elected and then.. It's on.

Be very wary of this proposal, It's gives more power to government bureaucrats and less power to you, the voting public. Remember, ask yourself: What's in it for me? The answer... nothing.

Inside The Mind of a Liberal

I can't sleep tonight so here I am wondering aimlessly around the interwebs. I came across an interesting article speculating why the Occupy Wall Street movement never really took off. There are a number of reasons for this but this article suggests that the 'left' hasn't embraced the OWS movement the way the 'right' has taken to the tea party movement. The article reads in part:

"Liberals tend to think they’re each unique in their ideology, while conservatives and moderates have the perception that most other people think the way they do."

It's an intresting article... take a look:

Link: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/02/study-suggests-occupy-wall-street-movement-undone-by-liberals-need-to-feel-unique 

The Tables Are Starting to Turn

As I predicted last week, it appears that the tables are starting to turn, Barack Obama's approval rating has now fallen to 37%.

You had to scroll way down to find it but an interesting story today from the Associated Press stating that Barack Obama's approval rating in the wake of the the partial government shut down is now at 37%. You heard almost nothing about it in the news media today.

I am of the belief that many of the media outlets don't know how bias they actually are. You see, a majority of news here in Canada and the United States comes from only a small handful of news sources... "The Wire" as it were. If the wire services (which are few to begin with) aren't reporting certain stories, you won't hear it on a majority of major media outlets.

I give you an example of that happening with today's story about Obama's low approval rating.

Below, is an excerpt (you can read the whole story here) from the story as it appeard on AP's Website:

Most Americans disapprove of the way Obama is handling his job, the poll suggests, with 53 percent unhappy with his performance and 37 percent approving of it. Congress is scraping rock bottom, with a ghastly approval rating of 5 percent.

Indeed, anyone making headlines in the dispute has earned poor marks for his or her trouble, whether it's Democrat Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, or Republican John Boehner, the House speaker, both with a favorability rating of 18 percent.

Now I present you with the wire version of the same story... in it's entirety:

WASHINGTON - A new poll says Americans are holding Republicans primarily responsible for the partial government shutdown.
    
The Associated Press-GfK survey finds plenty of disdain to go around as people size up the federal impasse. Most now disapprove of the way President Barack Obama is handling his job. And Congress' approval rating is a perilous 5 per cent.

    Overall, Republicans are taking the bigger hit in public opinion. In the poll, 63 per cent say Republicans deserve a lot of the blame. About half say Obama or the Democrats in Congress are largely responsible.

    The poll finds that the tea party is a significant influence among Republicans as well as a source of division. Forty-one per cent of Republicans identified themselves as tea party supporters and they want Republican leaders in Congress to stand firm.

 It should be noted that Obama's 37% approval rating is now lower than George W. Bush's approval rating at the same duration in his presidency. And at it's worst, Bush's approval rating was 33% and that was with the media crapping on him all the time. Unfortunately, the media is still in Obama's corner. Hopefully they wake up soon and start doing some actual reporting... like a CBS reporter did yesterday.

Glenn Beck - "The Forgotten Man"

As mentioned below, I've been listening to a lot of American radio talk shows the last couple weeks. In particular, I've been finding Glenn Beck very entertaining and informative.

On Today's show, he had a great commentary called "The Forgotten Man". It's a commentary about political power. How politicians put themselves ahead of the voting public and how they use vulnerable citizens to make that happen. It's 11 minutes long but well worth the listen... Link Below:

Link:
Glenn Beck - The Forgotten Man

Harper 'Tour Tax' Leaves Much To Be Desired

Thanks to CTV News the other night who brought attention to a recent story that I somehow missed. A new 'tour tax' recently brought in by the Conservative government will make it tougher for international music acts to play gigs across the boarder. And when two of my passions in life combine (Music and Politics), I just have to comment.

Now, the Harper government isn't specifically targeting musicians but rather this an unintended side effect (a political paradox if you will) of recent changes to to the immigration act here in Canada. More specifically, the temporary foreign workers law which came into effect in August. But as I mentioned in my first post, new Government initiatives often have unintended consequences in other areas.

This new law doesn't target the bands themselves but, rather the venues they play in. Under the new law, international acts coming into Canada are considered temporary foreign workers. Interestingly, larger international acts are exempt from this fee of $275 per band member. Why?... because big acts play larger venues who's primary source of revenue is music. So a small bar owner who brings in a band a couple nights a week would have to pay up because music is not their main source of revenue.

Some are in favour of these changes saying that this will give Canadian bands a first crack at gigs. What these people don't seem to understand is that Canadian acts are already getting gigs by opening for bigger international acts. In fact, this is the most common way that Canadian Indie bands gain exposure, by opening for a larger international band that people came to the bar to see. Yeah, Canadian bands may be getting a few more gigs but what good is it if no one is there to see you play?

Most of the music I listen to is on smaller labels, what passes as popular music these days baffles me. So naturally, I'm a bit upset as this. This law targets the small business owner, the small bands that are barely getting by. Yet, the big international multi-millionaire acts like Taylor Swift and One Direction get a free pass... doesn't seem to make sense does it?