Monday, October 17, 2005

quick question

What kind of response do you get when you write to conservative MPs and MPPs?

In my experience (mostly provincial) response is terrible. I'll email the entire tory caucus and four Liberal MPPs and get a response from my MPP (or his office... doesn't really matter which) within an hour, with follow-up emails confirming that my concerns have been forwarded to the minister, the policy adviser, the Premier, etc.

How are response times from other tory MPs, MPPs? Grits? Dippers?

In Ontario, we're getting our asses kicked. Tory needs to get on his MPPs' asses about this one if he wants the PCPO to be the party that listens to Ontarians.

oh toby <3

I came home from class today to find the following envelope in my mailbox:

(click to enlarge)


Now when there's something like that in our mailbox, I know it's for me. That's just the way things are around here.

So I run inside and excitedly open my obviously political mail. It's from Toby Barrett's riding assogiation. Toby Barrett is the only Ontario PC MPP that decided my emails on the smoking ban (or any of the emails I've sent to any of the Ontario PC MPPs, for that matter) were worth replying to.

He also gets bonus points for calling himself "Tobacco Toby."

Anyway, I open the sucker up and these are what I find:


(click to enlarge either image)

Now I love me some liberty, so if you read these letters, you'll see why I love Toby Barrett, too. MPPs like this give me hope for the PCPO.

I've never smoked anything in my life, but I'm tempted to take up cigar smoking for a night just to support this event. Luckily for my lungs and mouth, I don't have $150 to spend on a dinner, but anyone for who does and wants to support the cause, now you know the time and place.

And that's why Toby Barrett gets a cheesy little internet heart from me. <3

Thursday, October 06, 2005

why do Liberals hate freedom?

What is it with this new trend of Liberals coming up with some sort of scheme to force people to vote? I've seen it pop up in some blogs lately, have heard it from some young Liberals and now apparently this Liberal Senator wants to fine people who don't vote $50.

Under Harb's proposed legislation, registered voters who don't cast ballots would escape the penalty if they provide a written reason justifying their absence.

What the hell? Is this grade school?

And what if I don't vote, don't give a written explanation and don't pay? Will I eventually go to jail for not voting?

Dear Liberals:
How about pissing off and letting people decide what to do - or not do - with their vote?

I'm thinking that this grit thinks that if they force people to vote more people will vote for them. Their overwhelming urge to find a way around doing some GOTV reminds me of certain "Conservatives'" recent behaviour.

On the bright side,

Alex Swann, a spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, said the federal government is not interested in any sort of mandatory voting requirement.

For now... but I'm hearing about this a lot lately. Maybe just a coincidence? I hope so.

I think there's probably a good chance that any party that tries to pass legislation forcing people to vote with a penalty of fining them will probably have record numbers of votes... against them.

Saturday, October 01, 2005

Arnie for Pres!

"This bill simply adds confusion to a constitutional issue," [Governer Schwarzenegger] said in his veto statement. "If the ban of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional this bill is not necessary. If the ban is constitutional this bill is ineffective."

I'm not sure what his position on SSM is, and honestly I don't care. That's the most common sense thing I've heard from a politician in a long time. Maybe if we didn't pass so much useless legislation, government would be smaller and this wouldn't be an issue.

Read the whole story here.
I realize it's a pretty biased article, but you just need the facts, and the quotes. Besides, I'm too lazy right now to go looking for an article on the situation that isn't either church based Anti-SSM cheering him on or LGBQ (or whatever the acronym is) shunning him.
If you can't read an article objectively, it's not my problem.