This is the first of three (unrelated) videos that remind me of the emotions and surreal feel of September 11, 2001.

Video 1- Rescue Me 'Juiced'

The inherent disconnect from public reality of which Alberta's Progressive Conservative government suffers has been on display during the party's current leadership battle.


Nowhere has it been on display more than from the lips of current MLA leadership hopefuls.



Ted Morton



Listen to the speeches from Ted Morton, Alison Redford, Doug Griffiths, and Doug Horner, and you will hear promises to change the errors of the Stelmach government and to take the party in a new direction away from the curent path.



While P.C. members, proven sheep that they are, eat it all up with a juicy side dish of denial, everyday voters are beginning to notice the red flags of hypocrisy.



While P.C. members ask these particular candidates what they would do differently, voters on the street are asking why they didn't prevent the bad policies or make a stand in the first place. They were in cabinet.  They had a voice but failed to speak up.



To defend a certain bill in the Legislature, vote in favour of it and make it law, only to turn around months later and deride that very same bill with promises to 'end that bad policy' does more than make the speaker look like a fool.  It destroys credibility.



The more Ted Morton criticises the fiscal record of the Ed Stelmach era while hoping no one remembers that he was the Finance Minister, the less trust the average voter will place in him.



Rick Orman



If the slew of forked-tongued leadership hopefuls continue with this 'Never mind my record, I promise to change' style, and P.C. members begin to catch on, it could benefit remaining candidates Rick Orman and Gary Mar.



It could take attention away from Orman's 'yesterday's man' image (hands up, all those who want to go back to the Don Getty years.  Anyone...?), and deflect focus away from Gary Mar's habit of lifting platform promises right from the Wildrose Party's policy page.

Interestingly, if one of the Stelmach MLA's were to come out and acknowledge previous errors - apologise even, it could go a long way to regaining that candidate's credibility and improving his or her image.  It would set them apart and could boost their chances at success.

Given the culture of arrogance found at the heart of the Progressive Conservative party, it is doubtful any of them has given this a moment of thought.

I was a harsh critic of Jack Layton, especially in recent years.

Being so fervently against socialism, I found Layton's ideology toxic.  It was well beyond my own spectrum barriers and ran opposite, policy for policy and issue for issue, to everything I believed.

I ridiculed him in 2007 for wanting to pull our troops out of Afghanistan, then called him 'the most dangerous man in Canada' the following year.  I criticized his part in the Liberal-NDP-Bloc coaltion/coup d'etat attempt, attacked his anti-Alberta policies and his willingness to bash this province for political gain in Quebec.

The fact Jack Layton was a staunch environut was also good fodder for op-eds.

Since learning of his passing this morning from his valiant battle with cancer, I have read many long-time opponents and critics pay their respects to the former NDP leader and most of them repeat the same opinion: 'I'd never vote for him, but I'd sit and have a beer with him.'

I won't add to what is becoming almost cliche.  Truth is, I don't know if it would have been a great idea for me and Jack to meet up at the pub.  Politics would no doubt enter the conversation. Irish conservative plus beer plus leader of a socialist political party...

I will say this.  I have seen few other leftwing political leaders who have voiced their position with such conviction, without quickly resorting to cheap attacks or weak attempts at deflection.  I did not agree with the priorities of Jack Layton, the effects of which I believed were ever implemented, would range from the annoyance of bloated bureaucracy to the dangerous in the areas of economy and foreign affairs.

But I always knew that he truly believed he was on the right side of each and every issue.  His passion in the area of social programs was unquestioned.  Again, there could not have been more distance between us on the issue, but I admired how adamant he was that he was right.

His lasting legacy will be leaving his party in a once-unthinkable position as the Official Opposition.  It is no secret that it was Jack Layton, not his NDP socialists, who was responsible for the Orange Crush.  He took a dying party and deftly steered it into the void created by the failing Liberal party on the left at the exact time Canadian politics was morphing into a more divided right vs left dynamic.

While more and more Canadians warm to P.M. Stephen Harper and the once 'scary' Conservatives, Layton managed to create an image for his party as the 'anti-Harper' choice.  A smart political move, indeed.

A raised glass to you, Jack.

Parliament just became a lot more boring.

The ongoing battle to replace outgoing leader Ed Stelmach has been lackluster, to say the least.  While cheap shot politics isn't what is needed, none of the current leadership hopefuls have presented anything by way of individual ideas or policies that would make one stand out from the rest.

In reality, there is more excitement from Progressive Conservatives on social network sites than from the race itself.

Perhaps this is because no matter the candidate, the ideas promise to be more of the same of what Alberta has suffered from the Stelmach regime.  For most, the ideas ring hollow - attempts by Stelmach MLA's who are vying for the Big Chair like Ted Morton and Alison Redford to distance themselves from the policies they helped create smack of desperation.

The real problem Albertans have is that, when cutting through the rhetoric and grand promises, examination of actual track records reveal a fundamental problem with the party itself: the Progressive Conservatives have become almost all progressive and very little conservative.

Big spending riddles speeches, all the while vowing to cut spending and reduce government. 

The Stelmach government has been anything but conservative.  From the gouging of our energy sector with the ill-conceived royalty rate hikes to the ballooning of the deficit to added layers of bureaucracy, the P.C.s have all but abandoned the idea of real conservatism.

Anyone looking at the crop of leadership wannabes hoping to find evidence of conservative values will be disappointed.  When taking into account platform promises with the track record of each candidate, word and deed are found on opposite ends of the equation.

Many Tory supporters are quick to hold up Ted Morton as a 'real' conservative.  Morton's image certainly fits that description, but his actions prove otherwise.

As Finance Minister, it was Morton whose paws were holding the purse strings as the province's financial hole grew to unacceptable depths.  It was Morton who flew the trial balloon of a provincial sales tax - a fate akin to death to most Albertans.  At the time, he quipped:

"There are some theoretical issues that (head of the School of Policy Studies at the University of Calgary) Professor Mintz and others have identified, and we're looking at those, and we take them seriously."

He oversaw a 6% increase in spending while depleting the provincial Sustainability Fund, then when asked if the budget was his handiwork or that of previous vault key holder Iris Evans, replied with a firm and convincing "...well, neither."

Ted Morton might be the most 'right wing' of the candidates, but his history shatters his reputation.

So the P.C.s, and by extension all Albertans, are left with the reality that our new premier will be (at best) a small-L liberal leading a small-L liberal government.

If there is any shred of honesty remaining in the old, tired, corrupt P.C. machine, they will recognize what Albertans have known for years and drop the 'conservative' title from their name.  They truly are a progressive party at the core.

No matter who wins this leadership race, the next provincial election will be a choice between four left-of-centre parties - Liberals, NDP, Alberta party, the ruling Progressive Party - and the only true conservative political party remaining in Alberta, the small-C Wildrose.

That could very well be the end of the P.C. era in Alberta.

The current leadership contest for leader of Alberta's governing Progressive Conservatives has been a lackluster affair.  There isn't what you would consider a 'big' name in the race, no above-the-rest hopeful to lead the pack.

The list of candidates is a mix of those who are current MLA's who are spending their time trying desperately to distance themselves from the Stelmach government record (interesting to see Ted Morton twist and turn, condemning the very fiscal policies he was responsible for as Finance Minister), and has-beens like Rick Orman.

As I mentioned in a previous post, there is no real difference in their messages.  Their visions of the future are almost carbon copies of one another. 

So it is no surprise that in the absence of any real policy battles and with all the candidates jumping into the same lifeboat to escape the sinking S.S. Stelmach, some have begun to search for an enemy.  Naturally, some have turned their attention to the Wildrose Party.

The latest to launch an attack on the Wildrose was Gary Mar.  Lacking any substantial ability to call out his fellow leadership candidates, Mar instead chose to focus on the Wildrose, claiming the fast-rising party is "...not a threat."

He is right in one sense.  Mar probably won't win the leadership race, so the new kids on the political block pose no threat to him personally.  But in general terms, it speaks volumes.  For a P.C. hopeful to switch his attention away from his current battle and towards a completely different political party which has nothing to do with the leadership race indicates not only a lack of excitement in the P.C. contest, but also indicates how fearful the governing party is of the Wildrose.

By claiming at this time that the Wildrose is not a threat, Mar has proven that the Danielle Smith-led Wildrose is, in fact, a threat - a big threat - to the Progressive Conservatives.

And Mar isn't the only one shaking.  The new media world is full of P.C. supporters attacking the Wildrose party on twitter and Facebook.  Noticeable in their rantings is the absence of examples of P.C. accomplishments.  When asked to provide a Stelmach-era success story (even one), the keyboards fall silent. 

Given the seemingly endless laundry list of fumbles that continue to be exposed, that is understandable.

What Gary Mar, the other leadership candidates, and the Progressive Conservatives as a whole know is that the Wildrose party does pose a danger to their iron grip on power. 

The fledgling Wildrose has been rumoured dead more times than Abe Vigoda.  They weren't supposed to survive the merging of the Wildrose and Alberta Alliance parties.  They weren't going to last past the leadership contest between Danielle Smith and Mark Dyrholm.  The mass exodus (that wasn't) of former P.C. members from the Wildrose back to the P.C. fold was going to be a death-knell for the new party.  The resignation of Ed Stelmach was going to finally prove the end of the Wildrose.

Of course, the Wildrose is still here and still growing.

Critics failed to take into account two realities.  First, policy.  While the P.C. government has fallen into a cycle of pissing away our booms and then scrambling during the busts, the Wildrose party has created a platform based on fiscal responsibility and common sense.  While the P.C. regime plays catch-up on a regular basis with reactionary policies - or no action at all, the Wildrose agenda is one of being proactive.

The second factor overlooked by the terminally overconfident P.C.s is leadership.  While any leader can easily lead his or her party into the doldrums, it takes a certain kind of leader to put the party on his or her shoulders and lead them up. 

When you compare any of the Progressive Conservative leadership candidates to Wildrose leader Danielle Smith, the P.C. names pale in comparison.  While polls should always be taken with a grain of salt and a big scoop of scepticism, it is worth nothing that no Tory hopeful beats Smith.  Not one.

Maybe Gary Mar is right.  Perhaps the other leadership hopefuls, the P.C. hierarchy and the party members don't feel that the Wildrose party is a threat to their hold on power.

However, their words and actions tell a different tale.  The truth is, the eventual victor of the moribund Progressive Conservative leadership contest could very well be the one who leads their party into the opposition benches, ending more than 40 consecutive years of ruling the province.

Gary Mar and the others are not just running for Tory party leader, they are also running scared.

The much anticipated debate between the Progressive Conservative leadership hopefuls went down in Banff yesterday and it sure lived up to...th....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.......


Whoops, sorry about that...



Feeling at times more like a lost episode of Mr. Roger's Neighborhood than a political forum, the candidates agreed to agree on many of the issues.  The current MLA hopefuls like Alison Redford and Ted Morton went on about reversing decisions made while they were in cabinet, while Rick Orman continued the theme of returning to past times.

The overall impression?  No matter the eventual victor, it will be just more of the same, old, stale P.C. government.  A new coat of paint on a condemned house.  Lipstick on a pig.



Danielle Smith



With the media spotlight on the race increasing, it is understandable that the governing party would be rising in the polls.  Ed Stelmach's retirement announcement was probably good for 10% alone.  It will be after the race is done and Albertan's have a chance to come to terms with our new (unelected) premier that the public voice will be heard.



Looking at the crop of leadership hopefuls, there isn't one who stands out as a potential problem for Wildrose Party leader Danielle Smith when it comes to the campaign trail.



(Others seem to agree.)

Some like Morton and Redford will be hampered by the baggage of being perceived as left-overs of the unpopular Stelmach regime causing them to spend a good portion of their time explaining away their guilt instead of attacking Smith, while Orman's back-to-the-future promises brings to mind not the Klein era, but that of Don Getty.

Surely, no Albertan wants that.



Ted Morton



The Ted Morton equation is interesting.  The hyped 'mass exodus' of Wildrose members back into the P.C. fold was clearly overblown.  Conservative Albertans have seen through Morton's false image and have seen him in action - presiding over the purse strings while the provincial economy tanked.  When a Finance Minister uses the 'see?  It's not as bad as expected' line to describe a spiral into the red, it is the equivalent of expecting a gun shot and being told to feel better since it turned out only to be a stab wound.



Albertans aren't that naive, and we have long memories.  Wasn't it Morton who floated the provincial sales tax trial balloon...?

So now I dust off my Carnac the Magnificent hat and make the following prediction: the Wildrose Party will win a minority in the next provincial election, with the Progressive Conservatives (no matter the leader) as the Official Opposition.

And that is when the real fun begins.

As always happens in such cases, the wave of finger-pointing over the reasons behind the U.K riots has conveniently taken the focus off of the riots themselves.  While liberals are endlessly droning on about the economy, lack of jobs, and any other excuse they can dream up, it is up to a the usual few to speak the truth without the restraints of political correctness.

First, English-born Michael Coren gives his take:

"The racism of lowered expectations has led fatuous, liberal, white people to argue that gang culture is somehow part of the black and brown experience, with most of the victims of course being other black and brown people.
In fact this sub-culture despises women, gays, the weak, and anybody who stands in its way. It has no respect for anybody and anything, and is obsessed with promiscuity, violence, and cheap greed. Idiot politicians have done little, because they can afford to live in areas usually untouched by the violence and anarchy."

Read the entire column here - http://blogs.canoe.ca/corenscomment/consider-this/uk-riots/

Then, of course, is the dead-on analysis by the always-direct Ann Coulter:

"With a welfare system far more advanced than the United States, the British have achieved the remarkable result of turning entire communities of ancestral British people into tattooed, drunken brutes. I guess we now have the proof of what conservatives have been saying since forever: Looting is a result of liberal welfare policies. And Britain is in the end stages of the welfare state...

... Britain has a far more redistributive welfare system than France, which is why France's crime problem is mostly a matter of Muslim immigrants, not French nationals. Meanwhile, England's welfare state is fast returning the native population to its violent 18th-century highwaymen roots.

Needless to say, Britain leads Europe in the proportion of single mothers and, as a consequence, also leads or co-leads the European Union in violent crime, alcohol and drug abuse, obesity and sexually transmitted diseases. But liberal elites here and in Britain will blame anything but the welfare state they adore."

Read the entire column here - http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45446

I knew this would happen. I could have won some big time money if anyone had bet me. 

Ever since the new logo for the National Hockey League's re-established Winnipeg Jets was revealed, there have been those on the fringe who have felt compelled to moan and complain.

The logo, which features a tribute to our nation's air force, is a snappy creation that is distinct from any of the other NHL icons.  Of course, this has resulted in a minor backlash from those who have way too much free time on their hands.

Like do-nothing musicians, for example.

It seems the band The Weakerthans (who?) will not be able to support their new local team.  So offensive is the team's new logo that the elation of their city reclaiming an NHL team has been dashed.  How very sad.  Pathetic, even.

In a Sun article, band frontman John K. Samson is quoted as whining:

“Sports teams, of course, often have military implications to their names and logos, and sport as war is an understandable if overly simple simile, but I can’t think of another team anywhere that has attempted to attach itself as blatantly and directly to an existing, contemporary arm of the military.”

Is this idiot for real?

If Samson or anyone else who fancies themselves 'anti-war' has such an issue with the logo, then don't go to the games.  Perhaps growing up and realizing that the Jets logo isn't a call for Canada to go to war, but a tribute to those who have and would keep us safe - a hat tip to past and current brave fighter pilots who have risked their lives so that assholes like Samson can enjoy the freedom to tell the world what's on their insignificant little minds.

If Samson and his like reject the logo because of it's militaristic flavor, then by extension they are rejecting - scratch that - spitting on those who are our most courageous. 

And to think, all it would take for this issue to disappear is for John K. Samson to get a real job instead of pretending to be a rock star.  He'd have less time to worry about a hockey logo.

There have been times that Canada and the United States stood apart, not seeing eye-to-eye on some issues or simply choosing different paths.  Almost always these rare moments in our history have occurred with a Republican in the White House and a Liberal Canadian P.M.  Nixon calling then-P.M. Pierre Trudeau, who was about as left wing as you can get without falling off the spectrum, an 'asshole' on his private tapes is a classic.

How unique it is then to witness what is currently unfolding.  Canada and America are certainly on different paths today.  Barack Obama in the White House in the midst of implementing a nanny-state program as well as redefining American foreign policy to that of contrite weakness, even going so far as to put the American-Israeli friendship in danger.

In the Great White North, Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper is going after illegal immigrants and known war criminals inside our borders (something unheard of here), has turfed a bloated and ineffective long gun registry, and is exhibiting nothing short of true gumption and courage by going against the current global wave of anti-Semitism by reaffirming our nation's commitment to the Jewish state on the international stage.

It appears others agree with my claim that Stephen Harper has lifted Canada's international image to one of strength and righteous resolve. Writer Jordan Michael Smith at The Tablet has a super take on the issue.  Smith writes:

"As prime minister, Harper has transformed Canadian foreign policy toward Israel and the Middle East. Abandoning Canada’s longstanding posture of even-handedness in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the country has become arguably the most pro-Israel country in the world. From being the first world leader to cut off funds to the Palestinian Authority in 2006 when it was taken over by Hamas, to speaking out against growing global anti-Semitism, Harper has embraced Israel as has no Canadian leader before him. “It is hard to find a country friendlier to Israel than Canada these days,” gushed Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, in 2010. “No other country in the world has demonstrated such a full understanding of us.”

read the complete article here - http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/74467/true-north/
(h/t Dana Schwartz, The Rosen Group)

It is amazing how in today's world of digital cable and infinite satellite channels we still end up with the same three or four choices for weekend movie viewing.  Seriously, does Apollo 13 really need to be shown repeatedly on three different channels every Friday and Saturday night?  Is there a stipulation in the contract that states Spike TV has to show Scarface 18 times a month?  I mean, Goodfellas is an awesome movie, but every night...?

If you're looking for something different and perhaps a little out of the ordinary, here's a few suggestions. Hunt these television and movie titles down on DVD or online for a break from the usual weekend fare.

Firefly (t.v.2002-2003) - Joss Whedon's unique Space-western has one of the most fanatic segments of the sci-fi fan culture.  Set five hundred years in the future, man has abandoned Earth and settled in a new system.  The show is set after a civil war and the aftermath, including a powerful central government formed by the victors juxtaposed with the outlaw culture of the more 'western' outer planets.  Great storylines, cheeky humor, and characters that are interesting enough to make you care about them combine for this memorable, and much overlooked, cult classic.  Nathan Fillion (Castle, Dangerous Housewives) is perfect as the flawed leader of a ragtag team.  Viewing the series is best followed with the 2005 feature film Serenity, one of the best sci-fi movies of the past 20 years.

Jackie Brown (film 1997) - Quentin Tarantino's take on blaxploitation movies and a double-cross heist has almost become the director's forgotten work of art.  Voted in several Los Angeles polls as one of the top 10 L.A. movies of all time, the film suffered from the curse of being the follow-up to the Pulp Fiction typhoon. Critics and fans were expecting another PF, and instead got a more cerebral-yet-stylish double-cross story.  It benefits greatly from repeated viewings, as in all Tarantino movies there are several threads occurring simultaneously, and it takes a couple of times to figure out how everything fits.  And like in all Tarantino movies, the music works hand in hand with the on-screen action to create the exact feeling for the scene.  Pam Grier is perfectly cast as the lead, and Samuel L. Jackson is this Q.T. film's doppelganger, playing a weapons dealer.  Great turns by a subdued Robert Deniro and a very under-rated (and overlooked) Robert Forster as the all-important bail bondsman make this a great alternative when your Kill Bill DVD burns out.

The Avengers (t.v.1961-1969) - No, not the spandex tights-wearing, face-painted cartoon characters.  This British classic was responsible for creating the 'spy-fi' genre of the 1960's and '70's.  Centered around secret agent John Steed (Patrick Macnee) and his usual female partner, the duo fought a bevy of 'diabolical masterminds' who were usually odd-to-bizarre madmen with outrageous plots.  The series began out of the ashes of a one-year British show called Police Surgeon.  Retooling after lead actor Ian Hendry left, the show settled into a familiar rhythm of drama and kitsch.  Steed, with his trademark bowler hat and umbrella, faced danger first with Cathy Gale (Honor Blackman, who went on to become James Bond's Pussy Galore).  After Blackman left, Diana Rigg entered as Mrs. Emma Peel.  This pairing is by far the most well known, as the final year (the first Avengers in color) was the first broadcast in the United States.  For the final year, Canadian actress Linda Thorson did an admirable job as Tara King.  Great fun, unbelievable storylines, unforgettable characters.

Mea Maxima Culpa (film 2010) - A movie short that made it's way through the independent theatres and art houses, this delicious take on Edgar Allen Poe's 'The Tell Tale Heart' enthralls the viewer into forgetting the fact it's a short film.  Without giving too much away, I will say that watching the butler Manfred's decent into madness is chilling, and beautifully acted by John Byrne.  Suspense and horror as it should be.

Throughout its history, the United Nations has been the source of controversy. Given its role, perhaps it is understandable and expected that an organization representing the governments of the world would have its share of scandalous incidents.

Born out of the ashes of World War II and the failed pre-war League of Nations, the U.N. started off with an admirable goal: to give the nations of the world an avenue to air their differences, form resolutions, and most importantly avoid the risk of the world being thrown into another large-scale multi-national war.

Almost from the beginning, the authority of the international body has been on display. Whether holding rogue nations to account through the oft-used process of sanctions, bringing to light some unknown suffering parts of the world, or negotiating treaties to sidestep conflict, the United Nations has proven beneficial on many fronts.

But the organization has changed over time to the point that even some of its most ardent supporters have begun to question its direction and its effectiveness.

And this comes at a unique time in geopolitics.

Traditionally, Canada has been one of the most vocal nations of the world in proclaiming its support for the U.N. Canadians have long seen the United Nations has a valuable asset, and have in the past demanded the U.N.’s okay before allowing Canada to enter situations such as a military conflict.

To the people of Canada, the United Nations could have been considered a sacred cow. But after years of watching the U.N. morph into something unintended, minds are changing.



Canadian P.M. Stephen Harper
addresses the United Nations



We have witnessed the organization become more than a meeting place for negotiation and social programs. It has now moved dangerously close to becoming a global government while increasingly pushing its own agenda.

The U.N. demands obedience to their strict ideas on the environment and social justice, of which a quick study reveals emanation from the political left.

They even have assumed control of their own armed forces. NATO, which was always meant to be a separate body, has become the U.N. de-facto military arm. From Bosnia to Libya, the pattern has emerged: the Security Council authorizes action, and NATO carries it out.

We hear, years after the fact, that much of the information used to justify entering the Bosnian war was false. Many reports of mass-murder turned out to be fiction. The public relations spin that sold the idea of protecting vulnerable Muslims who were facing those two most horrible words – ethnic cleansing – has been found to be lacking in credibility after the fact.

Canadians watch as the U.N. and N.A.T.O. rush in to do the honorable thing and help the rebels rising up against their long-time oppressor Qaddafi in Libya. We initially support our government’s involvement in backing the Arab Spring movement, then question the action when rumors abound that many of the rebels are current and former al Qaeda fighters.

Have we become allies with terrorists through the platform of the United Nations?

The re-examining of the Canadian attitude towards the United Nations comes at a most interesting time. While the United States finds itself being led by a president busy expunging American tradition and implanting his far-left, contrite-to-the-enemy agenda, Canada has just embarked on its first era of majority Conservative government since the early 1990’s.



Canadian delegation boycotts
Ahmadinejad speech



Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has not been shy about voicing displeasure at the U.N. Back in September 2009 the Canadian delegation make international headlines by walking out of a droning, psychotic speech given Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The fact that it was the easy-going Canadians who correctly anticipated an offensive, anti-Semitic rant from Ahmadinejad and chose to walk out was unprecedented. The fact that it was the Canadians who walked out first, followed afterwards by the United States and other Western nations, was momentous.

Just a few weeks ago it was Canada again standing up and taking the lead when it was announced that North Korea would be – get this - the chair of the U.N.’s Conference on Disarmament, where U.N. members negotiate disarmament and other arms control agreements. Calling the North Korean regime “a major proliferator of nuclear weapons” and “not credible”, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird announced a Canadian boycott of the conference until the chair is replaced.

Again, it was an unprecedented move by Canada. Again, Obama’s America lagged behind. While not choosing to follow suit with a boycott of their own, U.S. delegates downplayed the significance of having a nation known for having an illegal nuclear weapons program chair a conference on nuclear disarmament.

Canadians have grown more than suspicious that the United Nations has lost its way. Common sense dictates that when we hear of more than 20 discussion papers and resolutions condemning alleged ‘apartheid’ crimes by Israel are introduced in less than one year (the misuse of that memorable term is an insult to the Black population of South Africa, btw.), compared to a single resolution condemning terrorist acts by Palestinians against Israelis, questions are bound to arise.

Even some Americans have noticed the shift in position between their country and Canada, stating their wish that the American leader would stand up and show some fortitude like Canada’s Harper.

It would be hard to imagine Stephen Harper embarking on the apology-style world tour Obama took soon after taking office, bowing before those who would do us harm.

While it would be easy to bask in the glory of Canada’s newfound voice on the international stage, the truth is we can only do so much. American influence is a necessity, for without it nothing can get done.

That is why, more than in other years leading up to an American presidential election, Canadians are tuning in and keeping an eye on the GOP contenders. In the fight against the growing world-wide viruses of Islamisation, anti-Semitism, the politically correct policies of open borders and lax immigration, and a global economic meltdown, Canada could sure use an ally in the United States.

Taking a moment to enjoy the morning sun before the inevitable weekend downpour, contemplating the wonders of an Alberta summer, and wondering why the hell everyone in Edmonton is being murdered...

Deadmonton: The Alberta capital is on pace for a record-setting year in homicides.  Edmonton police are stretched thin, city council is blurting the expected promises to tackle the problem, citizens are worried and ashamed.  The real shame is that political correctness is hampering any solution.  It's no secret that many of the incidents are related to the city's Somali population.  Yet when a frustrated city cop dares state the obvious, that without the help of that community it is almost impossible to solve the crimes, he becomes the focus of allegations of racism.  Solve the problem of immigrant gangs and you take a big step to solving the murder problem.

Why We Despise Politicians Part 57,534: Interim federal NDP leader Nycole Turmel's excuses when her memberships to not one but two Quebec separatist political parties were exposed rang hollow to the point of causing a nationwide, collective eye-roll.  Her claim to have obtained a membership with the Bloc Quebecois to 'support a friend', and not because she agrees with their raison d'etre of breaking up Canada, is pathetic.  That's like someone joining the KKK because you like the cap and gown, but not necessarily the lynchings.

Dhimmi More: New Jersey Governor Chris Christie revealed his true self this week during a presser when he answered questions about his appointment of a Muslim judge earlier in the year.  Christie, who many on the right feel would present a strong challenge to President Obama in 2012, went out of his way (bent over?) to defend his move and the judge in question.  Pressed on the issue of Sharia law, he snapped back that the: "...Sharia Law business is just crap… and I’m tried of dealing with the crazies...".  Tell that to the folks in London, England.  Or Sweden.  Or even Ontario, Canada, who came close to having their provincial government allow a parallel Sharia justice system.  Christie has been a favorite of Ann Coulter.  I wonder if this will lead her to change her mind?

The Spiral Continues: Remember how the world was going to self-destruct if the debt deal wasn't done on time?  Remember members from both parties claiming victory and credit for saving the economy?  Have you seen the stock market today?  Democrat and Republican politicians may believe their own bullshit, but the rest of the world - including the average Joe on the street - doesn't.  A higher debt ceiling equals more debt and bigger government, period.  We are beginning to think this is being done on purpose.  A revolution may be at hand.

Affirmative Action Heroes: First it was Superman, the quintessential American hero (and greatest immigrant success story in history) renouncing his American citizenship.  Now it's Spiderman who has undergone a P.C. transformation.  My former favorite comic action star is now a half-Black, half-Latino geek.  Exit Peter Parker, enter Miles Morales.  The fact that they chose to kill off the perpetually-teenaged Parker is unsettling.  The message seems to be, to raise minorities up you have to kill Whitey.  Poor Peter Parker.  He vanquished the Rhino, Doc Oc, and the rest, but he got tangled in the web of Obama-era political-correctness.  Oh, and the new Spidey might be gay.  Wallopin' Web-snappers!