Comments on politics, the culture, economics and religion by Paul Tuns -- in short, everything about the human endeavour from a non-hyphenated conservative perspective. I am Toronto-based writer and editor, whose articles, columns and reviews have appeared in more than 35 publications. I am editor-in-chief of The Interim, Canada's life and family newspaper, author of Jean Chretien: A Legacy of Scandal and a regular contributor to the book pages of the Halifax Herald.

 
From the 'Don't vote it only encourages them' files

Rick McGinnis in The Metro on the raw deal women voters get in the United States:

"It’s neither likely nor perhaps even desirable, but if half of U.S. voters withdrew their franchise in protest, it would wreak havoc with pollsters and campaign operatives at the very least, and delegitimize a dispiriting and tainted election at best. It’s a slap that would perhaps bring otherwise intelligent people back to their senses, and restore some decency to a process that has devolved into a shameful rebuke of a woman’s right to participate in their country’s political life."

(HT: Five Feet of Fury)
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:00 AM

 
Surge in black turnout has begun

Nate Silver at The New Republic explains.

I predicted this in August after visiting Pittsburgh and finding myself in a neighbourhood I normally would not travel through. The poor, black neighbourhood is typically not the place one would find political engagement, including voting, but most houses had Obama signs on their lawns. While one could explain this phenomenon by suggesting that party organization, community activists and peer pressure got the signs out and not voter enthusiasm, such an explanation only goes so far. The peer pressure (and other factors) will also conspire to ensure voters show up to cast their ballots. Seeing your neighbour and neighbour's neighbour advertise the black candidate for months and months before election day could have a dramatic effect on encouraging participation on election day -- or in advanced voting, as is apparently happening. I'm predicting a large margin of victory for Obama in the popular vote because polling is not capturing what should be an unprecedented turnout among black (and youth) voters.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:49 AM

 
ACORN -- the nut is cracked

Over at The American Spectator Online, Matthew Vadum looks at ACORN and its activities and the confusion it deliberately creates to avoid proper scrutiny. A sample:

"ACORN's many affiliates have extraordinarily sophisticated financial arrangements that are largely hidden from public view. ACORN uses its system of interlocking boards of directors to oversee its affiliates and make financial mischief.

As Jim Terry of the Consumers Rights League has noted, 'ACORN has a long and sordid history of employing convoluted Enron-style accounting to illegally use taxpayer funds for their own political gain.'

Look at a person named Donna Pharr. Pharr sits on the boards of at least 22 ACORN affiliates. She's also deputy treasurer of the Minnesota ACORN Political Action Committee and is listed by Michigan as the contact person for Communities Voting Together, a '527' pressure group.

And even now after it was revealed earlier this year that ACORN founder Wade Rathke covered up his brother's nearly $1 million embezzlement, Rathke remains chief organizer of ACORN affiliate SEIU Local 100, president of ACORN International Inc., and president and a director of ACORN affiliate Affiliated Media Foundation Movement Inc."

Also, look at Vadum's longer "Acorn: Who Funds the Weather Underground's Little Broth?", a Foundation Watch expose.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:34 AM

 
'Don't Just Do Something. Stand There.'

Russell Roberts explains in the Wall Street Journal the real lesson from the Great Depression: Do nothing. He demonstrates why by recounting actual history from 1932. First, Congress increased tariffs and the Federal Reserve contracted money supply. President Herbert Hoover increased spending by 40% and raised taxes to pay for it. A recession became a depression and America looked for answers from a Democrat, FDR:

"So Franklin Roosevelt came into office pledging stronger medicine. Enter even bigger increases in government spending. Government nationalization. Bigger deficits. Destruction of crops and livestock in the name of raising prices. Government-organized cartels. A greater empowerment of unions. It was a whirlwind of activity without any real plan."

And things got worse, not better, under the New Deal.

The point is that most of the things government can do to affect the economy doesn't affect it positively. We don't really know what works but history teaches us what usually doesn't.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:23 AM

 
The American election and national security

In the pages of the Wall Street Journal Frederick Kagan says national security should be the deciding factor in choosing a president. Just a quick comment: if something is a deciding issue, then it can be the decisive issue. Something has to tip the balance. Kagan likes national security. Over at NRO, Hadley Arkes argues that it is not too late to make this election about national security. I think that Arkes is wrong to say that President George Bush himself should be making the case that America is still at risk to terrorist attacks: "The sounding of that note would still remind the public, in a telling way, that there is a world of danger that has not been magically swept away by the romance of the Obama campaign." Bush is political poison and I don't get how conservatives still don't understand that. Arkes is right to say that McCain can still make the case that the "War on Terror" [sic] has not been won and that Obama risks setbacks in that endeavour. But the GOP is fighting against the widespread hope that Obamamania will magically sweep away global dangers. So it is too late to make this election about national security -- a national tragedy on the home front in the next four days notwithstanding.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:11 AM

 
Fact of the day

George F. Will in the Washington Post, in an column that is highly critical of the Republican ticket, notes:

"The Center for Responsive Politics calculates that, by Election Day, $2.4 billion will have been spent on presidential campaigns in the two-year election cycle that began in January 2007, and an additional $2.9 billion will have been spent on 435 House and 35 Senate contests. This $5.3 billion is a billion less than Americans will spend this year on potato chips."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:35 AM

 
Two reports on the cabinet shuffle

The Toronto Star reports:

"Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Industry Minister Jim Prentice will keep their portfolios, in a bid to send a signal of stability and confidence to Canadians and the markets."

CTV reports:

"In a surprise move, Prime Minister Stephen Harper will likely shuffle Jim Prentice into the Ministry of the Environment on Thursday, while Tony Clement takes over his industry portfolio, sources have told CTV News."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:29 AM

 
Slate's roster of writers & editors (almost) all support Obama

The list is here. There are a few non-voters although it is because they are not Americans (4). There are 55 Obama supporters, one McCain supporter, one "not-McCain", and one Bob Barr. Jack Shafer, editor at large, has always voted libertarian. Rachael Larimore, deputy managing editor and copy chief, said her support for McCain was an easy decision.

My favourite Slate writer Emily Yoffe, the "Dear Prudence" columnist, supports Obama and says: "Please, please, Barack, don't become another Jimmy Carter."

And I like what William Saletan about elections in general: "The basic purpose of voting is to get rid of leaders who govern badly."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:14 PM

 
'82 percent of American Catholics surveyed are functionally Protestant'

That's Rod Dreher's assessment after reading this L.A. Times story on Catholic voters. What is troubling to Dreher is that although about one in four U.S. Catholic bishops have spoken out about how abortion must be the determining issue for Catholic voters, the Times reports that according to polling data, "only 18% of Catholics 'strongly' agree with the statement: 'In deciding what is morally acceptable, I look to the church teachings and statements by the pope and bishops to form my conscience'."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:10 AM

 
Tyranny of Nice now in second printing































One of the proud co-authors blogs about it, saying:

"The Tyranny of Nice is your field guide for the fight for free speech!

So if you'd like to help spread that vital message around, and make The Tyranny of Nice the least-famous bestselling book in Canada, pick up your copy today!"

You can read an excerpt of The Tyranny of Nice at The Western Standard.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:00 AM

 
Things we'd like to hear Stephen Harper say

Gerry Nicholls has an unlikely list:

“The free market system is superior to socialism when it comes to generating wealth and prosperity.”

“We don’t need more government in Canada, we need less.”

“Since free speech is the life blood of democracy; it’s time to scrap election gag laws and it’s time to defang Human Rights Commissions.”

“Why is the government in the broadcast business? We should privatize the CBC.”

“The government’s monopoly on health care services must end; Canadians deserve a choice.”
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:51 AM

 
Anyone surprised that former Liberal PM availed himself of government for personal use?

The Ottawa Citizen reports:

"The federal government paid to conduct and transcribe hundreds of hours of interviews with Paul Martin and other political figures from his time in office, funding the creation of an "oral history" that the former prime minister says became the "spine" of the political memoir he released this week.

Library and Archives Canada hired former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister and academic Sean Conway to interview Mr. Martin and other officials he worked with in government, and prepare the transcripts that will become part of Mr. Martin's collection of records.

The transcripts of these interviews commissioned by Archives will become public only after Mr. Martin's death. But copies of the transcripts were provided to Mr. Martin and a researcher hired by the publisher of Hell or High Water: My Life in and Out of Politics to help write the book."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:45 AM

 
Quote of the day

"When it becomes dominated by a collectivist creed, democracy will inevitably destroy itself."
-- Fredrich August von Hayek
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:42 AM

 
The case against Obama

The courts. Specifically the Supreme Court. Some are laksadiscal over Barack Obama appointing Supreme Court Justices because the two he is most likely to replace are already part of the 4+1 (the one being Anthony Kennedy) liberal majority -- that is the judicial activists who are willing to over-ride clear constitutional strictures and the will of the people as determined by their legislative bodies. That might be true -- and it would be bad enough to replace the older liberal justices with younger justices that continue to commit constitutional vandalism for decades -- but it ignore the fact that good, constitutionalist judges might step down or pass away.

Ed Whelan has an excellent article about this at NRO and you should read all of it. Here's a taste:

"If we look to the future and take seriously the positions and principles that the five living-constitutionalists have already adopted, the Court, as it is now composed, may very well have five votes for, say, the imposition of a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage, five votes for stripping “under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance and for complete secularization of the public square, five votes for continuing to abolish the death penalty on the installment plan, five votes for selectively importing into the Court’s interpretation of the American Constitution the favored policies of Europe’s leftist elites, five votes for further judicial micromanagement of the government’s war powers, and five votes for the invention of a constitutional right to human cloning...

With its five living-constitutionalists, the Supreme Court is well to the left of the American public and threatens to engage in yet more wild acts of liberal judicial activism. The Court urgently needs to be transformed into an institution that practices judicial restraint. If Barack Obama is elected president, he will drive the Court further in the wrong direction, and the liberal judicial activists that he appoints will likely serve for two or three decades. Our system of representative government, already under siege, would be lucky to survive an Obama presidency."

The irony is that the courts, which conservatives say should not be politicized or the locus of policy-making, should be the determining factor for voting for John McCain.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:31 AM

 
Good grief

National Post: "Justin Trudeau top pick for Liberal leader: poll." As Kathy Shaidle says, there is never an avalanche around when you need one.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:19 AM

 
Things predictable and unpredictable

Predictable: Frank McKenna is not running for the Liberal leadership.

Unpredictable: Doug Finley is stepping down as the Conservative Party's director of political operations.

Both of these decisions will have a big impact on the future of Canadian politics.

McKenna -- who was never, ever going to run for the Liberal leadership folks -- might have been leader, but why would he want to be. He doesn't have federal political experience, is far removed from his political career (it has been more than a decade since he was the premier of New Brunswick), is making good money in the corporate sector and shows no inclination for party-building or being patient enough to wait for two elections to become prime minister. McKenna strikes me as someone who might be a fine prime minister but lousy leader for the Liberals right now. That is not to say McKenna couldn't have won, just that he isn't what the party needs now: a builder, a nuts-and-bolts guy, someone who has been tested by the fires of political experience. McKenna foregoing the leadership contest makes Bob Rae or Michael Ignatieff the prohibitive favourites and influences the kind of party the Liberals will become. My guess is that McKenna, had he ran and not won, would have strengthened Rae's hand in a three-way front-runner race, but by not running he has made Ignatieff is a little stronger.

Finley stepping aside also influences the kind of party the Conservatives will be. Every person has his own style, own priorities, and own personal relationships that affect the everyday decisions and long-term strategies a party carries out. I am not informed enough to discuss what Finley's own preferences are, but they no doubt will be different from whoever replaces him. This is all true even if the director of political operations is a mere puppet of the prime minister. But considering how heavy-handed Finley was, imposing tactics from the Ottawa headquarters on local campaigns, one can only hope that the next puppet has a lighter touch.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:01 AM

 
In defense of principled non-voting

Rod Dreher in The American Conservative [sic]:

"This will be the first year since I was old enough to vote that I will not cast a ballot in a presidential election. I quote a character from Richard Linklater’s 'Slacker' in my defense: 'Withdrawing in disgust is not the same thing as apathy'."

That is part of an interesting (for TAC) but predictable (its TAC) symposium on how various conservatives view the choice of John McCain and Barack Obama.

I hate when I agree with Lew Rockwell:

"But what effect does voting have? It gives them what they need most: a mandate. Nonparticipation helps deny that to them. It makes them, just on the margin, a bit more fearful that they are ruling us without our consent. This is all to the good. The government should fear the people. Not voting is a good beginning toward instilling that fear."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:44 PM

 
Smart is a relative term,
Or, the dumbing down of politics

Bryan Caplan:

"According to IQ tests, we're getting smarter. But when I was reading Warren Harding's 'Return to Normalcy' speech, it seemed way over the heads of a modern audience. The anomaly inspired me to plug Harding's words into an online grade level applet.

The result: The average estimated grade level required to understand Harding's speech was 16.06 years.

By way of comparison, Obama's 2008 acceptance speech had an average estimated grade level of 9.64 years - and McCain's was 7.72!"

And remember, as Caplan reminds us, we are getting more education today than during Harding's time:

"Harding was talking at least a standard deviation over the head of his median voter. Obama and McCain are talking at least a standard deviation below the head of theirs."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:12 PM

 
Redistributing wealth: a practical experiment

Robert Bluey reports this (perhaps apocryphal) story:

"In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference–just imagine the coincidence.

When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need–the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I’ve decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.

At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient deserved money more.

I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:46 AM

 
Dehumanizing patients

Writing in the New York Times, Sandeep Jauhar, a health practitioner (it is unclear, but he might have been an intern at the time), tells the story of a patient with a heart problem who died. Jauhar was asked to eulogize the man but in the eulogies before his own he found out so much about his former patient that he did not know, it is surprising he was asked to speak about 'Michael' at all. Jauhar reflects:

"I thought about how easy it is, with the time pressures of medical practice, to ignore social history, habits, the sorts of things that make a patient into a real person — and vice versa. Undoubtedly, such information would have helped me treat Michael."

The inclination to view human beings as patients -- objects of treatment -- rather than people is a problem within the medical establishment. Literally a dehumanizing problem.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:29 AM

 
Smaller towns better for minorities

The Vancouver Sun editorializes about a surprising study:

"Small towns sometimes get a bad rap for being insular, unwelcoming and uninteresting, slanders that more often than not originate in big cities.

But living in a small town offers many advantages over big city life, including the obvious ones of lower house prices, lighter traffic and relatively less crime of the sort that plagues large metropolitan areas.

A new study suggests another positive, a surprising one for those who buy into the derogatory depiction of rural life. Visible minorities report that there is less ethnic and cultural tension in small towns than in big cities...

The study by researchers Brian Ray at the University of Ottawa and Valerie Preston at York University found that 46 per cent of visible minorities in big cities felt racially related discomfort, compared with 40 per cent of visible minorities living in communities of 10,000 people or fewer."

Three theories.

1) People in smaller communities are just plain nicer.

2) Minorities are not ghettoized in smaller communities and thus become more like their surroundings. That is, assimilation leads to racial harmony. That seems to be one conclusion of Ray, one of the researchers.

3) Related to number two: there aren't self-appointed 'community leaders' who can fan the flames of racial grievance.

If it is number two, there are public policy implications. If it is number three, there is a lesson for the cultural, political and media elite.

Of course, the three theories are not mutually exclusive.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:18 AM

 
Another fine moment from the UK National Health Service

The Daily Mirror reports:

"A 25-year-old woman refused a smear test twice after a change in health policy has married her university sweetheart early after learning she is dying of cervical cancer.

Katie Hilliard was 19 when she first requested the test, but was told by doctors she didn't need it until she was 20. And a year later, she was told the revised policy for a smear test was at age 25.

Her worst fears were finally confirmed in March last year when a test revealed she had cancer...

Despite a hysterectomy, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, doctors have given Katie at best two years; at worst 11 months."

Ah, state-run health care, the hallmark of a compassionate society.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:56 AM

 
Montreal's gay new logo

















The Montreal Gazette says, "What image says "Greater Montreal" to you? If you guessed a stylized M in the colours of a roll of LifeSavers, give yourself a treat."

LifeSavers is one description.

It took a year to come up with the logo that Canada's second largest city will use to sell itself internationally.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:51 AM

 
AGS revisited

Baltimore Ravens 29, Oakland Raiders 10: Correctly predicted the Ravens would win easily. Not a hard call.

Carolina Panthers 27, Arizona Cardinals 23: Panthers overcame a 17-3 deficit with a 21-point third quarter. Cards WR Anquan Boldin returned from injury to have a good game: 9 catches, 63 yards, 2 TDs, plus one run of 30 yards. I thought the Panthers would beat the four-point spread.

Dallas Cowboys 13, Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9: I didn't think the Cowboys would win, but the defense held up, not allowing a TD although the Bucs were in the Dallas side's 25 yards four times. Roy Williams got his first TD in a Cowboys uniform. Cowboys TE Jason Witten has knocked out of the game early, making backup QB Brad Johnson even more reliant on RB Marion Barber.

Washington Redskins 25, Detroit Lions 17: Skins were favoured but few people thought they'd beat the 7.5 point spread. I said they would. But Detroit was ahead from the end of the first quarter until the middle of the third quarter. (First time all year the Lions scored in the first quarter.) Skins QB Jason Campbell had a good game: 23/28, 328 yards, 1 TD; Campbell hasn't thrown a pick all year.

Miami Dolphins 25, Buffalo Bills 16: I thought the Bills would win but four turnovers and just one TD for the Bills made the difference. Buffalo made numerous mental mistakes (having the ball stripped on a QB sneak, fumbles, an interception and getting sacked in the end zone for a safety) in the final quarter and weren't able to get back into the game. Bills blew a 16-7 lead.

New England Patriots 23, St. Louis Rams 16: I said: "Patriots win and unlike the football pundits I'll take them to beat the 7 point spread." Not quite. New England's defense kept the Rams to just one TD. The Pats offense was well-balanced. Prediction: Pats still win the AFC East.

New Orleans Saints 37, San Diego Chargers 32: Saints got ahead 37-20 on the strength of a 20-point second quarter. I predicted the Bolts would win a shoot-out. I got the shoot-out part right. Both QBs had big games. Philip Rivers had 25 completions in 40 tries, 341 yards, 3 TDs for the Bolts. Drew Brees was 30/41, 339 yards, 3 TDs. Teams combined for 860 net yards of offense.

New York Jets 28, Kansas City Chiefs 24: Lead changed six times as you might expect with the Jets this year; they had another three turnovers. It was easy to predict them winning but not covering the 13 points -- exactly what happened.

Philadelphia Eagles 27, Atlanta Falcons 14: RB Brian Westbrook was back and had a great game: 22 carries for 167 yards, with 2 TDs. He also had 42 receiving yards. The Eagles win handily and cover the 9 point spread, as predicted.

Cleveland Browns 23, Jacksonville Jaguars 17: I thought Jax would not only win but cover the 7 points. Browns needed two field goals in the final five minutes to win. Jax was incredible on 3rd and 4th downs: 11/20 (55%) and 2/4 (66%) respectively. But it was a strange game with Jags' QB David Garrard getting the second most yards for Jacksonville, including the most on the run (seven carries for 59 yards).

Houston Texans 35, Cincinnati Bengals 6: Houston had a TD in every quarter; Bengals didn't have one all day. I thought the Texans would win but wouldn't cover the 10 points. Oops. Houston is nothing special; Cincy is that bad.

New York Giants 21, Pittsburgh Steelers 14: I said: "Pittsburgh is favoured by three but the Giants look good enough to win." Through the first three-and-a-half quarters, the Steelers defense was very good, not allowing a TD despite the fact the Giants got into the red zone three times. But a missed long snap by backup long snapper James Harrison flew over the kicker's head in the end zone, scoring a Giants safety. They followed that up with a TD minutes later. Big Ben threw four interceptions.

Seattle Seahawks 34, San Francisco 49ers 13: I said the 49ers would win and win ugly. It was a bit of a strange one. The Niners led in possession (34:02) and had a substantial lead in net yards (388-261). RB Frank Gore was the Niners leading runner and receiver and new coach Mike Singletary benched J.T. O'Sullivan in the second quarter in favour of Shaun Hill who played in only his fifth game (in seven seasons). 'Hawks may have turned the corner or perhaps just feasted on an inferior team that is getting use to a new coach.

Tennessee Titans 31, Indianapolis Colts 21: Titans remain unbeaten (7-0) after a decisive second-half comeback. Indy played a great game on both sides of the ball in the first half, leading 7-6 going int half-time and were leading 14-6 partway through the third. But then their defense got sloppy, Kerry Collins continued to call a conservative, disciplined game for Tennessee and the Titans won. After giving up a TD at 3:38 (following an interception), Indy scored in an impressive and steady but meaningless drive over the last two minutes. I thought the Colts would pull off the upset but the Titans are an impressive machine with a incredible defense and efficient and useful offense.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:00 AM

 
This should seal the deal

Senator Ted Stevens, the GOP version of Robert Byrd, was convicted on seven counts of filing false financial disclosure forms, one week before he goes to the voters asking that they send him back to the Senate for a seventh full term. A moderate Republican, he is famous for defending the Bridge to Nowhere.

Stevens won a special election in 1970 to finish a term he was appointed to fill after the death of Democrat Bob Bartlett and since 1972 he has never garnered less than 66% of the vote. He is currently running behind Anchorage mayor Mark Begich (D) in his re-election bid. The seven convictions should end his Senate tenure. Good riddance.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:02 PM

 
Happiness gap between right and left

It is a matter of being part of the reality-based community. Grover Norquist, a conservative activist and president of American for Tax Reform, told the Washington Post:

"I'm very happy ... When I was 12, I realized the world was not organized around my desires and wishes. The problem with guys on the left is they never figured that out at age 12. And they're just irritated the world is not organized around their vision. This makes them grumpy."

I have often said that the essential difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives understand human weakness and offer policies that ameliorate the harm such weakness can cause (or learn to live with them) while liberals think that people are perfectible and are forever tinkering with policies that will realize that unachievable dream. There are enormous psychological consequences for liberals when after a lifetime of failure, they cannot make people more like the inhabitants of their Utopian dreamland.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:34 AM

 
A warning against NICE

Dr. David Gratzer warns Americans about the Democratic plan to import NICE from England. NICE -- the UK's National Institute for Clinical Evaluation and Excellence, the Blairite creation that determines which drugs and devices get government funding, and thus to which treatments patients have state-covered access -- is the model that numerous influential Democrats want to use to refashion America's health care system. The problem is NICE makes some typically bureaucratic decisions (read: boneheaded ones) in an attempt to control costs. Gratzer points to the case of Jack Trigg who can't get treatment for a disease that is blinding him in one eye because he is only half-blind.

American health care costs are sky-rocketing and something needs to be done, but putting treatment decisions in the hands of bureaucrats is not the answer. The government does not need to weigh in on treatment decisions, Gratzer argues, but rather make it easier for health care consumers to make decisions for themselves. That means basic information on price and quality needs to be made available. Gratzer does not dismiss a role for the state; he wants Medicare and Medicaid information to be released, compel providers of program recipients to provide pricing information and says Washington should 'promote standardization of medical records'. But these changes would "lay the groundwork for a more competitive health-care system and dispense with the need for a big-government intrusion."

It would be good for Republicans to take up this cause -- before its too late.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:22 AM

 
An honest endorsement

The Financial Times predictably backs Barack Obama, but adds:

"Rest assured that, should he win, Mr Obama is bound to disappoint. How could he not? He is expected to heal the country’s racial divisions, reverse the trend of rising inequality, improve middle-class living standards, cut almost everybody’s taxes, transform the image of the United States abroad, end the losses in Iraq, deal with the mess in Afghanistan and much more besides.

Succeeding in those endeavours would require more than uplifting oratory and presidential deportment even if the economy were growing rapidly, which it will not be."

I was amused by the FT editorial's concluding paragraph:

"The challenges facing the next president will be extraordinary. We hesitate to wish it on anyone, but we hope that Mr Obama gets the job."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:08 AM

 
Canada's Barack Obama























Michael 'Pinball' Clemons, former CFL star and Toronto Argos coach, is often touted as a political candidate, usually for mayor but sometimes for provincial or federal office. Either directly or indirectly, two sources -- a city manager and a Liberal senator -- for this Toronto Star story, both tout Clemons as Canada's Barack Obama. Richard Morris, manager of the city's energy efficiency office, says that Clemons should have his political eyes on something bigger than the city: "His influence is global. This guy could ... listen, Barack Obama has nothing on Mike Clemons, as far as I am concerned." Morris adds: "Mike's about hope, just like Obama. He needs some federal office to lead us to a broader horizon." Liberal Senator Jerry Grafstein said of Clemons: "His is the politics of hope." The whole article is like that, even when it isn't in the words of a source. Royson James, the author of the article, performs numerous acts of journalistic fellatio throughout the story but this is the most blatant example:

"Barely 5-foot-5, Clemons' size is measured not in feet and inches but in the heights to which his words can propel an audience or the width of the smile he elicits from an unsuspecting parking lot attendant he's just tipped."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:46 PM

 
Rooney rule

The Associated Press has reported that the NFL has voided St. Louis Rams' interim coach Jim Haslett's contract because a provision in it guarantees he will back as head coach next season if he wins six games this year. The provision is seen to be a way to circumvent the Rooney Rule which requires teams interview minority candidates for head coaching jobs (but not interim coaching positions). The Rams said, "We were looking for a provision that would ensure him an extension if he won a certain amount of games." Haslett took over after the Rams began 0-4 and won his first two games. Haslett's agent said he would have no problem interviewing for the full-time job after the regular season in order for the team to comply with the league's rule.

This is nonsense. Why go through with the charade of interviews with black would-be coaches who have no chance to win the job if Haslett demonstrates he can do a good job with the Rams? (What if he goes 9-1?) How will the league know if the Rams interview "in good faith" and with "an open mind" as the Rooney Rule requires?

The problem with the Rooney Rule was identified by Brian W. Collins in an article ("Tackling Unconscious Bias in Hiring Practices: The Plight of the Rooney Rule") in the NYU Law Review that was in favour of the Rule:

"If a franchise hires a head coach without interviewing a minority candidate, it faces a substantial fine and public condemnation. But if it hires a Caucasian head coach —- even while satisfying the Rule -— it may cause harm by perpetrating sham interviews. In contrast, if it hires an African American head coach, it will win
applause -— until it decides to fire him, "in which event they’d better have a passel of black candidates at the ready." As a result, every head coach hirer is now under a microscope."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:16 PM

 
Rogue Palin

Sarah Palin is becoming more of her own person on the campaign trail. The New York Post has all the gossipy details. It was unlikely that John McCain was ever going to win but Palin -- her lack of credentials, her folksy ways, her religious views, her lack of discipline -- will be handy explanation for what went wrong on the GOP side. She is setting herself up as a convenient excuse for the media story-tellers come November 5th and the first draft of history gets written. Incorrectly.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:15 AM

 
Chemistry and momentum in baseball

A few weeks ago, after the Boston Red Sox came back from a 7-0 deficit to win 8-7 on October 16 to stave off elimination in the American League Championship, Baseball Prospectus' Joe Sheehan questioned the stathead approach to baseball analysis that discounts chemistry and momentum and most of the other story-telling tools of traditional sportswriters and broadcasters. Sheehan said:

"[T]oday is one of those days where you bump up against the limits of your chosen medium, do the best that you can with the tools you have, and with a knowing nod concede that nothing is going to be good enough.

It's even more complicated than that, because a game like last night's challenges your belief system. Winning is about playing baseball better than the other guys do. The construct built up around the postseason, all of the soft words you always rail against—character, heart, experience, clutch—the ones that apply ex post facto and therefore are labels used to tell stories, not actual skills that affect outcomes... you know all these things are true, and you've spent your career trying to convince people to look past the storytelling."

Tom Tango protests at HardballTimes that no one in the stathead community claims there is no such thing as chemistry or momentum and then goes on to largely dismiss momentum. The problem is partly that if it can't be quantified, certain statistics-obsessed baseball analysts downplay the thing's role.

Sheehan's column tells the story of what happened in the Sox-Rays game. A beautiful story of the unfolding events of one game. That is what we fans watch and appreciate. It is what we love. The stats may give us a deeper understanding of why things happen, they might help predict the future, and they help us analyze the game better. But they are not what happened. It may not be chemistry or momentum or any of the other narrative tropes, but it is the game. Sheehan's story tells us as much about the game and acknowledges that probabilities were not the only thing in play.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:58 AM

 
Advice for wanna-be TV pundits

Tucker Carlson:

"Don’t wear white, show up sober and try to speak in complete sentences."

That's from an interesting article in the New York Times on the young pundits making their way to television screens. (Or as some snotty guy from the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University calls them, 'premature pundits'.) The Times quotes a former MSNBC producer admitting that conservatives are producing better young pundits, mostly thanks to the training provided by the Leadership Institute. Beverly Hallberg from the LI advises her students to look downward rather than upward, smile, and use lots of slogans and one-liners (noting flip-flop is a great term).
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:29 AM

 
What I'm reading

1. Ever Wonder Why? And Other Controversial Essays by Thomas Sowell.

2. "Development 2.0: Changing the Way Globalization Works," a report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

3. "The 400 Richest People in America," in the current special issue put out by Forbes.

4. "Is America's Infrastructure 'Crisis' Just Another Crisis for Socialism?," a Heritage Foundation WebMemo by Ronald D. Utt.

5. Liberals and the Surge by Peter Wehner at commentary.com.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:19 AM

 
US election prediction (Congress)

Republicans lose 14-19 Congressional seats.

Republicans lose eight Senate seats:

Alaska
Colorado
Kentucky
Mississippi
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Oregon
Virginia

Republican Norm Coleman beats Democrat Al Franken in Minnesota to keep his Senate seat.

Republican Saxby Chambliss retains his Georgia Senate seat.

North Carolina Democrat Beverly Perdue beats Republican Pat McCrory in that state's gubernatorial race.

With Matt Blunt not running for re-election in Missouri, Democrat Jay Nixon wins the gubernatorial race there.

November 4th will be a bad day to be a Republican.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:34 AM

 
A corrective to the dominant narrative on Greenspan's testimony

No, he didn't concede the death of capitalism. As you would expect from a former head of the Federal Reserve he couched his criticisms and observations in more nuance than most journalists are capable of appreciating. Tyler Cowen adds perspective and the appropriate links including Greenspan's prepared remarks. Here is the most important sentence from Greenspan: "Those markets for an indefinite future will be far more restrained than would any currently contemplated new regulatory regime." Sounds like an endorsement of capitalism to me.

Well, this might be the most important sentence in his presentation: "This crisis will pass..."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:51 AM

 
Any given Sunday










Oakland Raiders at Baltimore Ravens: The inept Raiders against a defense that completely shuts down opponents. Ravens are especially good at preventing the run which will force lackluster QB JaMarcus Russell to the air which means big, big trouble. Ravens favoured by 7. They do it easily, especially considering the Raiders are making an East coast trip for an early game.

Arizona Cardinals at Carolina Panthers: The Cards have a great air game with QB Kurt Warner looking like the MVP of 1999 & 2001. When the Panthers are on, they don't have a weakness: a top-rated defense, a pair of good passing targets and a strong running game. Cards defense catches a break with Panthers' offensive linemen Ryan Kalil and Jeff Otah out due to injury, and they'll be happy to have WR Anquan Boldin back from a sinus fracture that required surgery. Still, the Cardinals do very poorly away from Arizona. Panthers win and beat the four point spread.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Dallas Cowboys: The Boys have been miserable lately. With 40-year-old backup Brad Johnson quarterbacking for Dallas, Bucs will fill the box to prevent Marion Barber from running and take their chances that Johnson won't get it to Terrell Owens or Roy Williams. If he does, the Cowboys can break this open. That's a big if. Bucs win with the Cowboys in disarray. (Cowboys are favoured by 2.)

Washington Redskins at Detroit Lions: 'Skins are a very good team and RB Clinton Portis is a one-man scoring machine. The Lions are the king of suck. Detroit-area NFL fans will be spared the humiliation of watching the Lions lose because the game won't be televised; for the first time in 51 games, Ford Field is playing host to less than a capacity crowd. Washington QB Jason Campbell has not thrown an interception all year and Portis is averaging five yards per carry. Lots of pundits are dubious the 'Skins can beat the 7.5 point spread because their largest margin of victory so far this year has been seven points. But then, they haven't had the pleasure of facing the Lions.

Buffalo Bills at Miami Dolphins: Buffalo's Trent Edwards is looking like a seasoned veteran not a second year QB. He is making big plays when he needs to but doesn't get into the kind of trouble where he needs to make a lot of them. And Edwards is making WR Lee Evans look better than he really is. Edwards gets the opportunities to pass because defenses must always worry about the running threat of RB Marshawn Lynch. Bills win and beat the 1.5 spread even if their efficient but unspectacular defense doesn't stop Miami's Wildcat offense.

St. Louis Rams at New England Patriots: Rams are coming off back-to-back wins since changing coaches. The Pats are coming off their best game of the year. New England's D is finally looking good and Matt Cassel is hitting his passing targets. Patriots win and unlike the football pundits I'll take them to beat the 7 point spread.

San Diego Chargers and New Orleans Saints in London, England: Both teams are a disappointing 3-4. Chargers are coming off a loss in Buffalo where Philip Rivers wasn't passing like he has most of the year and LaDainian Tomlinson wasn't running like he has in past years. The Saints got thumped by Carolina 30-7. Either team could rebound, but the Chargers are the better team, especially with Reggie Bush out for the year for NO. Saints Drew Brees is the best QB in the NFL (didn't I predict that at the beginning of the season?) with 2,224 passing yards -- 400 more than anyone else. Rivers, though, is no slouch; he sports a 108.5 passer rating. The fans in London should expect a high scoring affair as both have terrible defenses.
Chargers win but don't cover the three-point spread.

Kansas City Chiefs at New York Jets: Which Jets show up? Does Brett Favre get to pass? Chiefs are using Tyler Thigpen, the backup to the backup quarterback and they are missing RB Larry Johnson who has been deactivated for personal reasons.
Jets win but they don't cover the 13 points.

Atlanta Falcons at Philadelphia Eagles: RB Brian Westrbook and WR Kevin Curtis are back for Philly. The Eagles are great at the blitz and will put tremendous pressure on rookie QB Matt Ryan. Philly may be 3-3 but when they are playing their best, they are one of the hardest teams to beat in the NFL. Despite the fact Atlanta is a surprising 4-2, the Eagles win handily and cover the 9 point spread.

Cleveland Browns at Jacksonville Jaguars: Someone called this the Disappointment Bowl. The Browns D is good and getting better but their offense is pretty close to non-existent. Derek Anderson is one of the worst starting QBs in the NFL (over the past three seasons he has 40 TD passes and 33 interceptions; this year 6 and six) and I can't believe he's still got his job. In the past three games we have finally seen what RB Maurice Jones-Drew is capable of for Jax and the Jags are getting healthier. David Garrard continues to impress as a game caller. No one is taking the Jags to beat the 7 point spread because every one of Jacksonville's games this year has been decided within a touchdown. That changes with this week's win.

Cincinnati Bengals at Houston Texans: The Texans have won two in a row against crummy teams. They'll make it three in a row, especially with QB Carson Palmer still out for Cincy. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a truly awful QB (2 TDs, 3 picks, 65.7 passer rating this year -- well above his career average). Texans WR Andre Johnson has emerged as a good receiver: 30 catches for 450 yards so far this month. QB Matt Schaub has been improving and is a steadier hand than he was at the start of the season. However, Houston has been allowing more than 29 points per game. Texans win but don't cover the 10-points.

New York Giants at Pittsburgh Steelers: Many football pundits are talking about this one as a possible preview to the Super Bowl. That's a little premature. Steelers defense is overwhelming and Giants QB Eli Manning has looked merely human over the past month, returning to the inconsistency that plagued him earlier in his career. But Giants defense is pretty darn good too (despite losing both of last year's starting tight ends) averaging five sacks per game. Pittsburgh needs their offensive line to prevent the Giants d-line from swarming Ben Roethlisberger. RB Willie Parker should return, providing running options if Big Ben is consistently under heavy pressure. Pittsburgh is favoured by three but the Giants look good enough to win.

Seattle Seahawks at San Francisco 49ers: Battle of two terrible NFC West teams, the 'Hawks would have been favoured before the season started but they have been awful. QB Matt Hasselbeck is out and Seattle is going with Seneca Wallace. Three key components of the defense -- Lofa Tatupu, Marcus Trufant and Patrick Kerney -- are playing injured. The wide receiver position has been a hospital ward merry-go-round. Seattle might have caught a small bit of luck with the Niners breaking in new head coach Mike Singletary, promoted from linebackers coach. Look for RB Frank Gore to return to form after an off weak. One pundit says "J.T. O'Sullivan gives the home side the edge." Another reminds readers of his weaknesses: "Nine fumbles, 10 interceptions, and 29 sacks." Does that tell you something about the instability of one or both of these teams? 49ers win in ugly one but I don't see them beating the 5.5 point spread.

Indianapolis Colts at Tennessee Titans: The struggling Colts meet the last undefeated team. Titans are 6-0 but haven't faced a challenge as strong as Indy even if the Colts are plagued by injuries; indeed, the Titans have yet to face a team that is above 500. The Titans defense smothers opposing offenses, but never count Peyton Manning out. He is best with his back against the wall. Tennessee is favoured by 4, but the Colts have won seven in a row in Monday Night games and Titans QB Kerry Collins has completed just 56% of his passes and has both 3 TDs and 3 picks. Colts pull off the upset.

Byes:

Chicago Bears: The Bears are the top scoring team in football. Time to show respect to QB Kyle Orton who has 10 TD passes in seven games. They should feast on the Lions when they return next week.

Minnesota Vikings: What happened? The defense didn't improve the way many expected after Minny opened their wallets in the off-season. They still have a below-average QB. At 3-4 they are only one game out of first but they seem so much farther from competing.

Green Bay Packers: QB Aaron Rodgers needs the week off and Green Bay will use the extra week off to prepare for the Titans when they return.

Denver Broncos: The Broncos are hurting physically and need the rest.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:30 AM

 
Give Dan Gardner an award

He rips into celebrity pseudo-intellectual Margaret Atwood for the drivel she had published in the New York Times this week. Gardner writes:

"I think life would be sweet if I were Margaret Atwood.

'As for what will happen to us next, I have no safe answers,' Canada's queen of letters wrote this week about the credit crisis. Such humility. And did I mention this was in the New York Times, no less?

'If fair regulations are established and credibility is restored,' Ms. Atwood went on, 'people will stop walking around in a daze, roll up their sleeves and start picking up the pieces. Things unconnected with money will be valued more -- friends, family, a walk in the woods. "I" will be spoken less, "we" will return, as people recognize that there is such a thing as the common good.'

Otherwise, Peggy? What then? 'If fair regulations are not established and rebuilding seems impossible, we could have social unrest on a scale we haven't seen for years.'

Huh. OK.

I file three columns a week. On each of the mornings I am scheduled to deliver, my editor asks what I'm writing about. Not every column is a work of rigour and staggering insight. Yes, I know. But it's true. Happily, my editor cuts me slack when I'm off my game. I appreciate that.

But not even on a day when my editor's heart overflows with pity for his struggling columnist would he let me get away with such slack, lazy writing.

'Perhaps' -- my editor would suggest -- 'you should identify the 'fair regulations' of which you write. They seem quite remarkable. I'd like to hear more. You say they will cause people to value the common good and walks in the woods and the delighted laughter of children. Amazing. But how? I'm sure the answer is obvious but please elaborate for those who are not so clever as you...'"

Gardner goes on to add:

"If I were to submit slack, lazy writing to the New York Times, I would get an e-mail that would thank me for my submission but regret to inform me that the New York Times will not publish my slack, lazy writing. So would anyone not in line for a Nobel. But she's Margaret F***ing Atwood! No one tells Margaret Atwood her writing is slack and lazy and please try again.

Without criticism, slack and lazy writing inevitably gets slacker and lazier. Which explains much about Margaret Atwood's publicly expressed opinions."

The problem is that Atwood is given the kid-glove treatment, even by Ken Whyte at Maclean's. The elite in this country do not challenge the preposterous claims made by the novelist -- from her musings about the prescience of the Club of Rome to her attacks on Stephen Harper's scaling back of an increase in arts grants being the first stage of his 'dictatorship'. Gardner says: "Luke Skywalker doesn't question Yoda, the Apostles don't doubt Jesus, and journalists don't fact-check Margaret Atwood."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:28 AM

 
Paper of record endorses liberal Democrat, loses all perspective

New York Times backs Barack Obama, beginning their editorial thusly:

"Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance."

Every election, we are told changes the face of America. Each of them, the partisans tell us, is vital. But as George Will counselled during the 1992 campaign, these are elections, not canonizations. They can be undone.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:23 AM

 
What's your doctor's VORP -- value over replacement physician

Writing in the New York Times, the leader of the GOP in the 1990s (Newt Gingrich), the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate (John Kerry) and the general manager of the Oakland A's (Billy Beane) says that Washington needs follow the Moneyball philosophy employed by the A's and abandon tradition (the status quo in health care delivery) to provide "evidence-based medicine." I'm not sure this is the answer to better or less expensive health care -- although it seems logical that it would -- but I couldn't resist linking to a column penned by Gingrich, Kerry and Beane.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:12 AM

 
What I'm reading

1. The Heritage Foundation's 2008 Index of Government Dependency by William W. Beach.

2. Facts and Myths about the Financial Crisis of 2008, a Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Working Paper by V.V. Chari, Lawrence Christiano, and Patrick J. Kehoe.

3. The Future of Food: How Science Will Solve the Next Global Crises in the current issue of Wired.

4. Nuclear Deterrence in the Age of Nuclear Terrorism in the November/December issue of the M.I.T. Technology Review.

5. Two good articles on the recent election. The Cato Institutes's Will Wilkinson wrote in the Ottawa Citizen earlier this week to congratulate Canadian voters for staying home on October 14 and thus improving the outcome of democracy. And Rebecca Walberg wrote in yesterday's Edmonton Journal on what she calls the "untapped support among Canadian voters for social conservatism."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:05 AM

 
Worst. List. Ever.

The Ten Best Egg Cups at The Independent.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:00 PM

 
Quote of the day

"Central Bankers never quite get right the balance between the supply and demand for money, just like the Soviets never quite got right the balance between producing left and right boots."
-- Publius at Gods of the Copybook Headings
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:22 PM

 
Cool stuff on YouTube

1. A great moment from Family Feud -- the orginal Feud with Richard Dawson in one of the most memorable moments in game show history.

2. Spongebob in China. Freaking hilarious. More about China than Spongebob.

3. The Rolling Stones performing Honky Tonk Woman live in Hyde Park 1969.

4. Take On Me: Literal Video Version -- song lyrics that match the video. There's also a Head Over Heels: Literal Video Version.

5. I'm not a John McCain fan but his speech at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner in New York was great and worth re-watching.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:20 PM

 
AGS revisited

Buffalo Bills 23, San Diego Chargers 14: I was wrong predicting the Chargers would beat the two-point spread. I saw this one live and it was thrilling. Rivers never really got his air game going and the Bills stopped the Bolts running game. A fourth quarter pick stopped a decent San Diego drive and prevented a come-from-behind victory. Bill beat their toughest competition of the year.

Carolina Panthers 30, New Orleans Saints 7: I predicted a Saint upset but the Panthers defense totally stopped Drew Brees. Saints lost Reggie Bush to a season-ending injury, too.

Chicago Bears 48, Minnesota Vikings 41: I thought that the Bears would win by three. I also thought Chicago's defense would keep this a low scoring affair.

Pittsburgh Steelers 38, Cincinnati Bengals 10: Correctly predicted the Steelers would beat the 9.5-point spread.

Tennessee Titans 34, Kansas City Chiefs 10: I said the "Titans smothering defense will prevent the Chiefs from scoring but their own 24th ranked offense makes it a longshot to beat the 9-point margin." Oops. KC has been outscored 68-10 in their past two games.

Baltimore Ravens 27, Miami Dolphins 13: I wrongly thought the Fins would get the upset. Baltimore stopped Miami's Wildcat offense.

New York Giants 29, San Francisco 49ers 17: Why I am not showing the Giants the love. I said, "I don't buy a Giants win by ten-and-half." Still, despite the wins, it looks like the mediocre Eli Manning of old rather than the budding superstar that showed in the closing stretch of 2007, last year's playoffs and the first three or four games this season.

St. Louis Rams 34, Dallas Cowboys 14: What the heck?

Houston Texans 28, Detroit Lions 21: Here's what I said: "Normally you don't take a team like the Texans to beat the nine-point spread, but this week you do." Detroit scored 11 fourth-quarter points to make it close, but they are looking like a team that is destined for 0-16.

Green Bay Packers 34, Indianapolis Colts 14: I thought Indy would win. Green Bay played a solid game and scored two TDs on interceptions which inflated the Packers' score. QB Aaron Rodgers had his third consecutive game with a 100+ passer rating and fifth of the year.

Oakland Raiders 16, New York Jets 13 (OT): I thought the Jets would win. They didn't. Again the Jets, who obtained Brett Favre in the off-season, went with the running game: 242 net rushing yards, 176 net passing yards. Raiders scored a 56-yard field goal with 2:06 left in OT.

Washington Redskins 14, Cleveland Browns 11: I thought the Skins would win by more than seven but they only eked out a field goal victory. Washington RB Clinton Portis (27 plays, 175 yards, a touchdown) is making a case for offensive player of the year and he could be an MVP candidate if Washington wins the division.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers 20, Seattle Seahawks 10: Here is what I said: "Tampa by 10.5? That's a lot and it isn't a bet I'd take even though I won't be surprised to see the Bucs do it. That's called hedging, folks." They won by 10. Now you understand my hedging. The 'Hawks are pretty awful, providing a disappointing final lap for coach Mike Holmgren.

New England Patriots 41, Denver Broncos 7: I said the Pats as the football pundits were predicting the Broncs. Pats played their best game all year. Injuries are piling up, but it was a good sign that the defense, which has been disappointing all year, held the high-flying Broncos to just one TD. QB Matt Cassel connected with Randy Moss for two TDs and Wes Walker for another. The Buffalo Bills should start looking over their shoulder.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:06 PM

 
If you are going to attack Obama over Ayers

This is how you do it. Scare the hell out of independent voters over Barack Obama's radicalism. I don't think it matters anymore, but because John McCain doesn't provide a compelling case to Americans to vote for him, he might as well consider an ad that forces Americans to reconsider their support for his opponent.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:38 AM

 
Back to blogging some time next week

Super busy because next week is production week at The Interim. Also, I'm off to Buffalo on Sunday for the Buffalo Bills and San Diego Chargers game. It's my first football game, so it should be fun.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:06 AM

 
Any given Sunday










San Diego Chargers at Buffalo Bills: Chargers are on a hot streak and have everything going their way and Philip Rivers has become an excellent QB, deftly moving the offense. The emergence of Rivers as a great game caller means San Diego relies less on the running game and that is as much the reason for RB LaDainian Tomlinson's poorer stats this year as LT's broken toe. The Bills are coming off their bye week so are rested, especially important after losing QB Trent Edwards for a game due to a concussion. Buffalo is adept at stopping the run but not so great at stopping the passing game, which is what Rivers will employ to get the job done. Bolts win and should beat the two-point spread.

New Orleans Saints at Carolina Panthers: Last week, the Bucs showed that the Panthers defense wasn't what was advertised. Or at the very least, they demonstrated that it could be beat. The Saints and QB Drew Brees are even better poised to rack up the points, especially with WR Marques Colston and TE Jeremy Shockey likely to return. Saints win despite the odds-makers favouring the Panthers.

Minnesota Vikings at Chicago Bears: The Vikings haven't lived up to their billing, something that happens when otherwise good teams don't have good quarterbacks. Chicago's defense is good and its offense, led by ... I can't believe I'm saying this ... QB Kyle Orton, is more than adequate. The Bears are always tough in their den. Bears win but don't beat the 3-point spread.

Pittsburgh Steelers at Cincinatti Bengals: Pittsburgh might be hurting but the Bengals are the Bengals. Steelers beat the 9.5-point spread.

Tennessee Titans at Kansas City Chiefs: Titans smothering defense will prevent the Chiefs from scoring but their own 24th ranked offense makes it a longshot to beat the 9-point margin.

Baltimore Ravens at Miami Dolphins: Ravens defense is pretty good but Miami has got its act together, with innovative offensive plays and a defense that stops the running game. That means the Ravens will need underwhelming rookie QB Joe Flacco to make good passes, something he has not shown a consistent ability to do. Miami should pull off their third victory in four games.

San Francisco 49ers at New York Giants: Last week's defeat at the hands of the Browns notwithstanding, the Giants are one of the best teams in the NFL and should have no trouble exacting revenge after last week's loss. But the Niners have an offense capable of scoring so I don't buy a Giants win by ten-and-half.

Dallas Cowboys at St. Louis Rams: Boys QB Tony Romo is reportedly going to play with a broken pinky finger. Addition of WR Roy Williams from the Lions adds another passing target for Romo -- if he can pass. Sure the Rams beat the Skins last week, but Washington dominated the game and St. Louis scored because of Skins turnovers. Don't expect Dallas to cough up the ball three times. Dallas wins and covers the seven points.

Detroit Lions at Houston Texans: The Texans haven't been very impressive this year, but the Lions are comprehensively awful. They don't have their best two players: WR Roy Williams was sent to Dallas for draft picks and QB Jon Kitma is on the shelf. Lions are finally admitting they are rebuilding. Normally you don't take a team like the Texans to beat the nine-point spread, but this week you do.

Indianapolis Colts at Green Bay Packers: Not sure what Packers team will show up. Not sure what Colts will show up. Edge goes to the Colts who have the better QB (Peyton Manning) and healthier squad (which is saying a lot). Indy is favoured by one. They better that.

New York Jets at Oakland Raiders: Brett Favre has hit his groove and the Raiders are a mess. Jets beat the three-point spread.

Cleveland Browns at Washington Redskins: Some people think the 'real' Browns have finally arrived because they've won two in a row. One of those games were against the Bengals so that doesn't count. The Browns offense is improving but the Skins, when they are on, are as good as anyone in the league. They beat the Browns by more than 7 points.

Seattle Seahawks at Tampa Bay Bucanners: Bucs are the better team and playing at home and will beat a 'Hawks team that has battled injuries to their receivers and haven't really been able to put things together this year. Now they are without their game caller Matt Hasselbeck. But Tampa by 10.5? That's a lot and it isn't a bet I'd take even though I won't be surprised to see the Bucs do it. That's called hedging, folks.

Denver Broncos at New England Patriots: The Broncos can score and the Pats defense hasn't been that strong so I expect QB Jay Cutler to find a way to put points on the board. But the Pats are still a very good team (WRs Wes Walker, Randy Moss) which will use more of its underemployed running game to keep Culter off the field, so I expect New England to win at home. Pats are favoured by three but a lot of pundits are questioning that, in part because the Broncos have beat the Patriots in five of their past six meetings in Foxboro. Not this time.

Byes:

Arizona Cardinals: At 4-2, they have at least a two-game lead on San Fran and the rest of the division. After not playing this week, they'll still be on top of the NFC West.

Atlanta Falcons: They are tied for the NFC South lead at 4-2, matching their win total for 2007. Do they even want this rest and break their momentum?

Jacksonville Jaguars: This is the first of four consecutive bye weeks because their next three opponents are Cleveland, Cincinatti and Detroit.

Philadelphia Eagles: Although they are 3-3, the Eagles are at the bottom of the NFC East and need to regroup.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:49 AM

 
Calgary Grit exposes the sources

Calgary Grit has an amusing post:

"You Too, Can Be An Anonymous Liberal!

Do you have a grievance? Not happy with someone else in the Liberal Party? Wanna float your buddy's name for leadership? Sure, you could speak out. But why do that when you can be an anonymous Liberal...

But how should you identify yourself? Not by your name or title, silly. Here’s a handy guide:

Influential Liberal: You know a former Cabinet Minister. Or you once met a Cabinet Minister. Or you once saw a Cabinet Minister at a convention.

Senior Party Member: You’re over 30.

Liberal Insider: You were a poll captain on your local Liberal campaign.

A well connected Liberal: You’re friends with Warren Kinsella on facebook.

Veteran Liberal: You’ve been bitching about the party’s leader since Turner.

A Liberal source: While you may not have voted Liberal this time, you have in the past.

Liberal Strategist: You've criticized the party's strategy over beers."

Gone are the days when a "Liberal source" was either Ray Heard or anyone from Martin's inner circle.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:14 PM

 
Bob Rae as Liberal leadership contender

Not as disastrous for the Grits as people think. Damian Penny says of the idea, "I can't see the Liberals committing political suicide by making one of the most unpopular premiers in Ontario history the party leader." Yes, but he was an unpopular NDP premier and now he would be leader of the Liberals. Different creature. Furthermore, about one-third of present-day Ontario was either not here during the NDP reign of error or weren't of voting age. Of the two-thirds who were here, many of them have short political memories. And many others will see an older Rae in red as a step up from the younger orange and green Rae.

The idea of Rae as Liberal leader is not as crazy as it sounds. I know many Tories who are eager to face a Rae-led Liberal team in the next election but that is a mistake. Rae is articulate and passionate, he can provide a hopeful vision for the future, and he knows how politics works. He wouldn't pull a hissy-fit and not talk to the Liberal pollster for ten months if he disagreed with the pollster's advice. He wouldn't wait until the eve of the election call to have a campaign plane ready. He wouldn't highlight his leadership rivals as part of the Liberal team, giving them a platform to build their profiles and reputations. He wouldn't fire the people with two and three decades of Parliamentary experience and bring in his own people -- actually he would, but those people would also have two and three decades of political experience themselves. Politics isn't for amateurs, and Rae has been doing it for a long time. Dion was a cabinet minister for a decade and didn't seem to pick up how Ottawa works.

I would also guess that Rae would be in for the long haul, perfectly happy losing the next election, before eventually winning, and thus would build the Liberal Party back up rather than risk hurting the Grits for a long-shot chance at early victory. I don't think the same can be said for most of the other Liberals who want to lead: Michael Ignatieff wants to do things, wants to govern; Frank McKenna (if he is really interested) won't be keen on giving up his corporate jobs in exchange for a long-time in the political wilderness; others certainly want to restore Liberal hegemony quickly. But Rae knows what it is like to bide one's time and build for eventual success.

In short, I think Rae would be a formidable leader for the Liberals and tough opponent for the Conservatives. Rae is a lot like Jean Chretien -- he has politics in his bones and his instincts serve him well. The political right in this country underestimated Chretien for a long time. It would wise for them to not make the same mistake with Rae.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:04 PM

 
Watch Tyranny of Nice authors on Michael Coren

YouTube video and links on Five Feet of Fury.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:52 AM

 
How to stay sane

Tyler Cowen has four ways and asks readers to add one of their own. Cowen's list: "I try to listen to beautiful music at least once a day, I don't check my portfolio even in the best of times, I hug a loved one at least one more time than was expected (with adaptive expectations this is hard to sustain over time but I have my tricks), and also I avoid television advertisements as much as possible." The readers provide an interesting and diverse list, from reading Chesterton to exercise to pharmaceutical (or other) drugs. Considering the libertarian bent of Cowen's blog, I am a bit surprised that 'not caring' seems to be an option people overlook. On most days I'd fall into that category, but on others sanity is maintained by 'perspective': by any historical or geographical standard almost everyone in the Western world lives comfortably compared to those in the past and the people who are barely surviving in much of the developing world today. My problems and the issues we in Canada face are insignificant by comparison. And then I go back to not caring.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:15 AM

 
Herald against s.329 of the Elections Act

The Halifax Herald editorializes against the archaic s.329 of the Elections Act -- the secion that states:

"No person shall transmit the result or purported result of the vote in an electoral district to the public in another electoral district before the close of all of the polling stations in that other electoral district."

The Herald says the law cannot be enforced, but more importantly the rationale is dubious:

"It’s also hard to argue knowing the results of Atlantic Canada’s 32 seats would cause B.C. voters to stay home."

Or otherwise change their voting behaviour. Considering the staggered voting schedules, there would relatively few people who would vote in the final hour or so. Or choose so late in the day to note vote. I find it hard that anyone interested enough to watch the results would be moved to vote (or not vote) a particular way simply because of a handful of results in the East. More importantly, I doubt that enough people would be so affected as to alter the final results in a single riding, let alone the makeup of Parliament.

But back to enforceability. Again, I point you to Stephen Taylor's excellent post against s.329:

"What is to stop an Atlantic Canadian from updating her twitter status as to the result of her Newfoundland riding? Or the Prince Edward Islander from posting who is in the lead on his Facebook wall? Since the possible forums for national broadcast have gone from a limited three television networks to practically limitless social media outlets, this particular provision of the Elections Act is de facto unenforceable."

Taylor concludes:

"[T]he law does not reflect reality and must be changed. What remains to be seen is whether change will come from mass social media violation of s.329 or through the legislative process."

My guess is that there must be mass violations of the law before this provision is amended.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:14 PM

 
What?

Unless she has access to some polling that proves this, I can't believe this sentence by Canadian Press' Joan Bryden:

"One of a series of gaffes that bedevilled the Tory campaign -- Calgary incumbent Lee Richardson's suggestion that immigrants are more likely to be involved in crime -- actually boosted the party's numbers in the suburbs and exurbs of Toronto."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:56 PM

 
Layton's insane argument

NDP leader Jack Layton said:

"I think he should realize that far more Canadians voted against his government than voted for it. He should respect Parliament and respect the results of the election, and we'll proceed in the recognition of that fact."

To be clear, this is what Layton is saying: Stephen Harper should abandon those who voted for the Conservatives and govern for those who voted against him.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:50 PM

 
Paul Wells on the Liberals

I don't often quote Paul Wells. Often he is too cute by half. But he is absolutely right about this:

"CalgaryGrit on the new, more compact Liberal caucus:

'The one bright spot in this is that it will be a small, but impressive, Liberal caucus. Dion, Rae, Ignatieff, Kennedy, Dryden, Hall Findlay, Goodale, Dosanjh, Trudeau, Garneau, LeBlanc, Dhalla, Holland…I could name a dozen more quality MPs easily.'

It is easy to quibble with any of the names Dan mentions, but take the broad point. These people are grownups.

Is it too much to ask, then, that they act like grownups in the next Parliament?

I’m not talking about decorum. Tempers will rise and insults will fly. But on the long list of complete Liberal failures in the last Parliament was an inability to take the long view; to look past tonight’s national newscasts and the apparently overwhelming need to get a clip of a barking MP onto them; to remember last week’s story and keep reminding Canadians of it; to build a narrative, using the simple crafts of storytelling, about the government they faced and the government they wanted to become; to use supportas strategically as contention; to notice when one day was different from others and use a variety of techniques to spread that message among Canadians; to develop a communications strategy more sophisticated than firing off six identical emails a day to the automatic-delete sections of 100 reporters’ emailboxes (”Minister X is letting Canadians down on xxxxx by his performance on file yyyyyy, said Official Opposition Whatsis Critic zzzzzz. ‘I see here in the Globe that frumf frumf frumf frummp,’ Mr. zzzzzz said….”).

Here is some gentle counsel for the next Liberal caucus, from a guy who watched the last Liberal caucus: if you discover you’re devoting 80% of your energy in Ottawa to Question Period, then soon enough you’ll look back at 2008 as a high point."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:14 PM

 
Left can't wait 'til January to get power

Two guys from the Harvard Business School have a plan to make Barack Obama president before the Electoral College convenes:

"The present January inaugural date is fixed by the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. Changing that would take years, not days.

But there is a way out - if our political leaders are smart, courageous, and public-spirited enough to take it.

Assume that Barack Obama wins the election, as polls show is increasingly likely. The following day, Vice President Cheney should be prevailed upon to resign. Using his powers to designate a successor under the 25th Amendment, President Bush should then appoint, and Congress should confirm, Obama as vice president (just as Richard Nixon appointed Gerald Ford vice president in 1973 when Spiro Agnew resigned). Bush himself should then resign, elevating Obama to the presidency - as Ford became president when Nixon resigned. Obama should then appoint Joe Biden as vice president.

With Congress's confirmation of Biden, the new administration would be in place, on the job, and ready to tackle the economic crisis - in November, not January. (The electoral college's official ratification of the election results in December would merely rubber-stamp the transition.)"

(HT: The Corner)
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:52 PM

 
The award for best commentary on the election goes to...

Robert Fulford. Here is his basic argument:

"The market crisis was only one of the problems besetting the Conservatives, and not necessarily the worst. Two other obstacles stood in their way. One was the traditional Canadian attitude toward Conservatives. The other was Stephen Harper."

About problem number one for the Tories, Fulford says:

"[M]uch of the electorate, maybe two-thirds, accepts the left-liberal approach to national affairs and embraces big government as the norm. These voters consider right-wing politicians automatically suspect, perhaps slightly illegitimate. Sometimes Canadians defeat the Liberals but even then we embrace Conservatives only if they look and act as little like conservatives as possible."

That means more centrist pap from the Harper Conservatives. Or is that 'Harper Conservatives [sic]'? After all, they can't win if they act like conservatives. That's a problem, although the Harperites tell us they have a plan.

About Harper, Fulford says:

"From the beginning, he has acted as if his kind of government is not only right but self-evidently right. He assumes (his manner demonstrates it) he's taken the wisest course in every field from foreign policy to taxation, and that everyone should agree. His followers find that reassuring, but his stance does nothing to make converts.

It is in the delicate matter of stance, the quality produced by the mingling of political goals and personal feelings under the pressure of circumstances, that the Conservatives have appeared least attractive. In the everyday business of government, their style looks austere and rigid. Tonally, they are inhibited and joyless. Mr. Harper himself projects a strangely mundane quality. Even in his own words, the Conservative program rarely sounds better than competent. No one would argue that competence is unimportant, but when it goes slightly wrong it emerges as mediocrity.

Mr. Harper's presentation of himself registers as remarkably unambitious. If Mr. Mulroney was far too ambitious (setting out, ruinously, to solve the problem of Quebec sovereignty forever), Mr. Harper has been too timid in the goals he's set for himself and the country. It's hard to consider anything he accomplishes as particularly challenging to the voters. He's been more effective denouncing his opponents than explaining his own program's virtues. Too often, while holding the office of prime minister, he's sounded more like someone seeking it."

That's some damn good punditry. Read it again because it is more insight than the average newspaper offers up in a week. Yet, there seems to be a contradiction in what Fulford wants. Canada doesn't trust conservatives but Fulford wants Harper to articulate his (presumably) conservative views more clearly. Perhaps that would help move the country rightward. Perhaps. Or maybe it scares the country away.

Fulford says Harper "leaves the impression that he thinks the really crucial job of the Conservatives is to keep the Liberals out of power." It is possible that is all there is in the way of the Harper agenda. Maybe that is the plan. Perhaps the Tories just want to stop the leftward ratchet of Canadian politics. That's not Fulford's conclusion, but it is where his observations can lead readers. For many conservatives, keeping Liberals out of power is, or at least should be, too modest of a goal.

For Fulford's part, he says Harper lacked passion and that is the Conservative leader's problem. Harper might be an emotionally distant WASP -- probably is -- but his emotional detachment might also be part of the strategy to paint the Conservative brand as safe and moderate. Whether it works is unknowable. If you think that is a smart strategy, you point to 143 seats and say it worked. If you don't like it, you point to the 12 seats the Tories are short of a majority and say it didn't. Analysis is often biased by one's views. I'll stick by my admitted unsatisfying analysis that we don't know, and can't know, whether an emotionless Harper is a good strategy.

Righteous indignation and joyful hope are two emotions that often do work in politics. Harper hasn't effectively tried either. But stoicism is part of Harper's problem, but only part. Remember the first part of Fulford's column: Canada doesn't like conservatism, or at least conservatives. A passionate Harper cannot change that.

All that said, Fulford's column is the best political commentary running this morning in the mainstream media.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:11 AM

 
An election post-mortem

The Calgary Herald editorializes:

"So near, yet so far. It was not the majority Prime Minister Stephen Harper wanted, but he should still take Tuesday's much strengthened minority as a healthy mandate to govern.

For this election was, at its root, a referendum on leadership. By a convincing margin, Canadians have decided he is better able to lead Canada through difficult economic times than Liberal Leader Stephane Dion."

This is stark contrast to the broadcast commentary last night of 'why bother?'

I would suggest that Prime Minister Stephen Harper use the renewed mandate to get something done. For years I've heard about the 10 or 20 year plan that Harperites have to move the country rightward; they might not have that long. Part of the problem, it must be said is Quebec. The province's collective values are far to the left of the rest of the country. (Take out Quebec and polls on Afghanistan are evenly divided. Take out the Quebec MPs and same-sex marriage would have been defeated in Parliament in 2004. And one could keep listing issues on which Quebec opinion or the representatives of Quebec voters veer to the left when the rest of the country sits in the center or even on the right.) If, as it seems, Quebec voters didn't like Stephen Harper because he wanted to reduce arts funding, we (small-c conservatives) have a long way to go. I don't buy that Quebec turned against the Tories over (just) arts funding; this particular storyline is polite code for 'Quebec is a bunch of statists'. One should never say never, but one cannot easily foresee that the Tories can win enough seats without Quebec for a solid majority or that it can win a significant number of seats in Quebec to break through that magic 155 ceiling.

So what now? Probably not much. Harper will be hailed as the man who delivered a pair of minority governments and gained seats for the party in three successive elections. That is impressive. Remember in 2003, it was suggested he would never be prime minister and with the coming Martin juggernaut, we were in for another decade in the political wilderness. Yet, there will be questions about whether he has hit a ceiling. I'd say he is close, that the real ceiling is 150-160 seats. I would guess that in his quest for those additional dozen seats to a majority Harper will play it exceedingly cautious, which means the necessary reforms to taxes and programs (to reduce them both) isn't on the agenda.

Across the aisle, it is only a matter of time until Stephane Dion is showed the door and is replaced with someone ... well, competent. The Conservative victory was perhaps less a win for the Tories than a Liberal loss due to Dion's weakness as leader. What happens to the Tories when someone who can speak English fluently is chosen as Liberal leader? When that person can articulate a hopeful vision for the future of the nation? Or adequately address the fears people have about the future? When the Liberal leader understands the cut-throat nature of politics? What happens when the Liberal leader can unite more of the progressive vote in this country? The long-term Harper plan is to squeeze the Liberals from the right while the NDP takes votes from the Grits on the left. That happened this time, but there is no guarantee that happens next time or every time. The low Liberal standing right now is not the result of some great realignment in politics but rather a reflection of Dion's uninspired -- actually non-existent -- leadership.

The NDP once again failed to make the big breakthrough they thought possible, but 37 seats is not unimpressive. NDPers will claim victory even if it wasn't the victory they had mind. Jack Layton, the urban socialist, won in Newfoundland and northern Ontario. Not bad.

The Greens, predictably, did not win the seat some pundits were (ludicrously) suggesting they could. They will need a leader that understands that they are a political party before they can make the modest steps to 10% overall in the polls. Yet again, they didn't live up to their pre-election day polling.

The Bloc remains as a protest party against whoever is in power. They might lose some support when their popular leader Gilles Duceppe decides he has had enough of Ottawa politics. We are often told this is right around the corner, but he seemed to be enjoying himself during this past campaign. I wouldn't bet on him leaving any time soon.

The political map has changed, and in some short-term ways significantly, but the politics will be the same: cautious Harper not doing much, the Bloc screaming about how Ottawa is encroaching on the rights of Quebec, the NDP claiming to represent working Canadians and railing against big business, and the Liberals apparently lost (as they always are when not in power) looking for a strong leader who no doubt will ride in on his white horse sometime next year. And Canadians get to enjoy another round of the most entertaining sport on earth: politics.

Why bother? Why not?
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:58 AM

 
CBC coverage

Why does David Frum lead readers of his NRO blog to the CBC story on the election? That story, by the way, has an unusual lead for the national broadcaster's omnibus story on the election results: "Two prominent faces in Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's previous caucus will be missing in Ottawa as a result of Tuesday's election. Voters rejected former cabinet minister Michael Fortier's bid in Quebec and booted Rahim Jaffer from his Alberta riding." The Tories increased their seat total by nearly 20 should be the lead. Or Tories fail to win a majority. Or Stephane Dion's job is insecure. Or Justin Trudeau wins his Papineau seat. But what does the CBC lead with? A non-incumbent (Fortier) and a backbench MP (Jaffer) not winning their seats.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:20 AM

 
Good night

Sweet dreams. Unless you're Stephane Dion.

Some thoughts tomorrow and checking back on my predictions after final results are in.

Last word: none of the parties will have the money to fight another election any time soon. Any punditry that doesn't acknowledge that isn't worth listening to.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:39 AM

 
For what it is worth

Craig Oliver, who is almost never right or insightful, predicts this parliament will last two years. Former Harper mouthpiece Sandra Buckler says two to two-and-a-half years. Peter Donolo says the opposition isn't likely to have interests that converge to bring the government down any time soon.

Brian Tobin says Canadians are getting tired of politics.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:37 AM

 
Jaffer is now behind

NDP lead in Edmonton-whatever. Can the NDP win a seat in Alberta? Is that reason enough to boot Stephen Harper out of the leadeship?
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:35 AM

 
Turnout

58%

Pundits are disgusted. "A sad number" says CTV talking head.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:33 AM

 
Craig Oliver, get over it

He asks Gary Lunn why did we bother with an election for a Tory increase of just 20 seats. A minority of 144ish seats is better than one of 124-127 seats.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:31 AM

 
John Moore's premature anti-Harper comment

CFRB host on the Full Comment blog says that this election shows that Stephen Harper is not a master tactician.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:29 AM

 
Kicking him while he is down

Tom Kent on CTV said that Stephane Dion ran a low-brow campaign and that his repeated attacks on Stephen Harper as a liar "grated on the ears."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:27 AM

 
NDP almost win a seat in Alberta

National Post reports that NDP came within 1000 votes of upsetting Rahim Jaffer in Edmonton-Strathcona. One of the other Alberta seats haven't been called for the Tories yet.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:25 AM

 
More on Dion

CTV reports that the Liberal leader thought policy could win the election.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:25 AM

 
Dion: will work with government

Liberal leader says he will cooperate with Stephen Harper on the issue of calming the waters of the economic storms. Not clear what that means. More conciliatory than Jack Layton's speech and it would appear that there is no coalition with NDP. And then Dion starts talking about progressive issues: leg up for poor kids, fighting climate change.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:17 AM

 
Dion

Jokes his first comment would be to CTV, but it comes off as pissy. What a whiner.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:13 AM

 
Strange definition of 'holding their own'

That's the National Post description of the Liberals in Ontario despite a loss of 10 seats in that province.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:11 AM

 
Most important question out of tonight

What is the future of the Liberal Party? With possibly just two seats in the Praires and 10 fewer seats in Ontario, what direction does this Quebec-Toronto-Atlantic Canada party take?

Notable, too, is that the Tories made major gains, even if not always with a victory, in many Toronto ridings, Brampton and Mississauga, as well as Vancouver. In other words, Conservatives make inroads with the visible minority/immigrant vote.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:05 AM

 
Oh no

Justin Trudeau is MP for Papineau. Let the media slobbering begin.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:04 AM

 
Liberal values defeat Tories in Quebec

Fr. Raymond de Souza:

"A key lesson of the 2008 campaign is not really that Stephen Harper blew it with his arts funding cuts. The lesson is that despite years of assiduous and eager capitulation on every Quebec issue, the foundation that he built was still fragile enough to be overcome by a minor issue that spoke to issues of identity, values and culture. That Quebec voters see themselves as progressive rather than conservative does not change the fact that in Canada, like the United States, we have our values voters too."
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:03 AM

 
Nice try

Jack Layton says that no party has the right to impose its agenda without support from the opposition parties. A loser's veto?
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:59 PM

 
Toronto Star headline: 'Harper victory tempered by disappointment'

Not from what I hear: a victory with 10% more seats is a still a victory. TorStar story, by Tonda MacCharles, here.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:57 PM

 
If only the campaign were longer

Stephane Dion could have won. So say some Liberals.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:54 PM

 
Nice to Stephen Taylor on the right side of an issue

Blogging Tory Stephen Taylor is against S. 239 of the Elections Act (which prohibits the broadcasting of results before all Canadians have voted).
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:52 PM

 
Papineau

Too close to call. Justin Trudeau is leading by 1,125 with 202 of 239 polls reporting. CTV won't call it. Other networks have.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:49 PM

 
Gilles Duceppe

Thanks Quebec voters for the sixth consecutive majority.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:46 PM

 
Bloc's 50 seats

What does it mean?

Nothing. Sovereignty is not back on the agenda. It does mean that Quebec voters are not conservative but still don't trust the Liberal Party.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:41 PM

 
Jim Flaherty wins

Income trust question is settled.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:32 PM

 
Generally speaking

Tories closed the gap in Toronto.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:30 PM

 
Reporter to Gerard Kennedy

CTV reporter: "Do you have leadership aspirations."

Better question: "Do you think Liberals will blame you for foisting Stephane Dion upon them?"
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:29 PM

 
Didn't mention this earlier because blogger was down

Michael Ignatieff's victory speech in Etobicoke-Lakeshore was partly in French. In other words, he is running for leader.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:27 PM

 
Oakridges-Markham

Tory Paul Calandra is ahead. Lui Temelkovski still might pull this off for the Liberals.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:24 PM

 
Robert Fife

"We all know that Stephane Dion is over."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:22 PM

 
Global TV

Reports that Stephane Dion won't step down but that any seat total starting with "7" indicates serious trouble. No poop Sherlock.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:20 PM

 
Great comment at Small Dead Animals

Someone named Sounder: "Well gag a maggot. Trudeau II is on the way?"
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:55 PM

 
Take that

Liberal Stephen LeDrew to NDPer Joy MacPhail: "I know you don't let facts get in the way of a good argument."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:52 PM

 
Liberals lose Welland

In a big way. Incumbent John Maloney finishes third.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:52 PM

 
Joy MacPhail, witch

Former NDP minister in BC makes nasty comments on Global TV about Tories increasing their support in GTA: "[Voters there] think they have to join the bandwagon."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:48 PM

 
Garth Turner gone

Tory Lisa Raitt declared the winner in Halton.

I don't know what is better: Raitt winning or Turner losing.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:47 PM

 
CBC just called a minority government

At 10:46 PM, about one hour after CTV.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:46 PM

 
Tories are second in Quebec

24.5%, compared to 22.5% for the Liberals.

Andrew Bachand, former Progressive Conservative MP who quit the Tories because he didn't like Stephen Harper, is trying to make a comeback in Sherbrooke. He is in third.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:44 PM

 
CBC is reporting...

Liberals are not leading or elected in any BC riding.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:38 PM

 
One of the three big stories tomorrow

Tories' lack of talent in Quebec for their cabinet.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:27 PM

 
NDP could lose Quebec seat

Thomas Mulcair is behind in Outrement.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:25 PM

 
Another boring and wrong storyline

The election was called for no reason. BS. A gain of 15 seats is an improved mandate for the Tories.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:21 PM

 
Under-statement

Tom Clark: this is going to be a long night for the Liberals.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:17 PM

 
Potential seat change in Ontario

According to CTV:

Tories up 9
NDP up 5
Liberals down 14
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:17 PM

 
Bonnie Brown defeated in Oakville

Great news. Called that one correctly.

Lisa Raitt is leading Garth Turner in Halton. Called that one, too.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:14 PM

 
Joe Volpe is losing

With four or five polls reporting.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:09 PM

 
Story of the night on all channels

Conservative failure to make a breaththrough in Quebec.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:06 PM

 
Global TV talking head

Says Bloc Quebecois are called the Bloc because they blocked the Tories.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:04 PM

 
CTV ticker

Has the Greens leading in one riding.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:50 PM

 
CTV calls...

Election minority government. Don't know the size.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:49 PM

 
CTV ready to make a call

At 9:48 -- nearly ready to make a call. "Very, very close."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:48 PM

 
Tories: not dead yet

Contra the Harper death watch, Robert Fife says the Tories at the Calgary HQs are happy with the Atlantic Canada results. Insiders tell Fife that the party is on target for 140-145 seats.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:45 PM

 
Craig Oliver, idiot

The Harper death watch has started.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:44 PM

 
Tories pick up a seat in PEI

In Egmont. It's not being officially called but Gail Shea won for the Conservatives.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:40 PM

 
May would have won...

... if kids five years and older had been able to vote. She really said that.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:36 PM

 
Perhaps they should have played Danny Boy

Has a losing candidate ever been led into a rally with bagpipes as Elizabeth May just was.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:34 PM

 
Atlantic Canada popular vote change

Tories down 6, Liberals down 5.

Tories down 26% in Newfoundland. Good night for Danny Williams although he was starting to weasel his prediction saying this past week that his ABC campaign would be a success even if Fabian Manning won. Not that it mattered.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:32 PM

 
Standings

Liberals: 17
Tories: 10
NDP: 4
BQ: 1
Independents: 1

Green leader Elizabeth May defeated.
Independent Bill Casey won.
NDP elect first MP in Newfoundland.
Fabian Manning loses his Nfld seat. Got that one wrong.
Robert Thibault defeated for the Liberals.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:30 PM

 
Watching CTV

Thinking Paula Todd has the roundest head I've ever seen.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:29 PM

 
Sources watching Atlantic Canada TV & listening to radio

Implies that Liberals have lost support to the Greens and put a number of seats there in close contention.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:24 PM

 
Craig Oliver

Describes his eye-sight (he is legally blind) as seeing French impressionism.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:19 PM

 
Insightful

Ann McGrath, the NDP president, says on CTV that Quebec and Ontario will be important to all parties. Duh.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:17 PM

 
CTV silliness

Goes to a reporter from MuchMusic to see what the youth vote wants. "Like all voters, the number one issue for youth is the environment."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:14 PM

 
Surly Beaver has results

Here. I won't report results but an independent in Nova Scotia has won.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:09 PM

 
Dion saving his job

Tom Clark reports that insiders in the Liberals say that Stephane Dion must come within 10 seats of the Tories to keep his job. That's called setting the bar very high.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:06 PM

 
CBC producer on calling the winner

"We are very, very careful with that call."

And then the CBC reporter wishes her producer "a smooth night."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:54 PM

 
CBC Newsworld

Currently covering itself within a behind the scenes tour of the CBC News Election Special. Because the media loves to cover itself.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:53 PM

 
CP24 insanity

CP24 is scrolling ridings, candidates and vote totals (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ...) even though polls don't close for another 41 minutes.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:46 PM

 
CPAC is re-playing the English-language leader's debate

Why?

If there are undecideds in B.C. who haven't voted, might they rush out to cast their ballot now?
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:44 PM

 
Sheila Copps is nuts

Stephen Harper should be turfed as leader no matter what the results are.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:41 PM

 
NDP strategist predicts major breakthroughs

I didn't catch the name, but on MDL NDP windbag dismisses the notion of a coalition. NDP will have a big "breakthrough" in Quebec, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan. And by breakthrough she means winning seats.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:37 PM

 
Dumb meme

Tory minister didn't vote for a Conservative. (Because there was no Conservative candidate in her riding.)
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:35 PM

 
Political Staples things to look for

Greg Staples has a list of questions that will be answered tonight. I provide my predictions (in italics) after each question:

- who wins the most seats, who is the leader of the opposition: Tories, Dion (for now)
- what percentage of the vote does the winner get: no less than 36%, possibly as high as 39%
- do the Liberals set a new low in popular support: probably- can the NDP poll above 20%: no
- can the Greens poll above 10%: no
- can the Greens with a seat: no
- do the Liberals and NDP (and maybe Greens) win enough seats whereby their combined total is more than the Conservatives: no
- do the Conservatives lose seats in Quebec: no
- do the Conservatives win enough seats elsewhere to make the loses (or lack of gains) in Quebec enough to have lost them a majority: no majority without seat gains in Quebec
- will Justin Trudeau win: no- how many Cabinet Ministers do the Conservatives lose, I peg the over/under at 3: not including retirements, one or two (Gary Lunn & Michael Fortier)
- do any of Diane Finley, Gary Lunn, Michael Fortier and Peter MacKay lose: See above.
- related - does Elizabeth May win: no
- were the polls correct: they were when they were conducted
- are the Conservatives wiped out in Newfoundland: no, Fabian Manning survives
- do the Conservatives win a seat in PEI: yes
- do the Conservatives win all seats in Alberta again: of course
- who wins the popular vote in Ontario: Tories, but just
- who wins the most seats in Ontario: Conservatives
- does a party leader quit tonight: not tonight, unless Liberals fall below 60 seats
- will Gerard Kennedy lose: Probably, unless the Conservative Jilian Saweczko falls well below 8000 votes- will Ralph Goodale lose: No. I would have said otherwise two weeks ago.
- will Garth Turner lose: yes
- will the Conservatives lose popular support in Alberta: no, in part because the Liberal vote is not motivated to come out
- will the NDP gain another seat in Quebec: no- will any party have elected representatives in all ten provinces: Only the Tories can, once they win a seat in PEI
- will the Conservatives will a seat in the Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver: yes, depending on how you define Vancouver
- will we see a new record low set for the winning party (i.e. less than 36.27%): no
- will Michael Ignatieff lose: no- will the Liberals be shut out of British Columbia: No. I would have said differently two weeks ago.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:31 PM

 
The political realignment question

Mike Duffy and Charles Adler likes the idea of a coalition of progressives. Adler: "I think a merger could be in the works." Rutherford: coalition maybe but not a merger.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:29 PM

 
The leadership question

Two of the three radio talk show hosts (Michael Harris and Charles Adler) on MDL say Stephen Harper's leadership is one the line if he doesn't deliver a majority or, at least, a much larger minority. Dave Rutherford is the lone, sane, dissenting voice.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:28 PM

 
Great insight

Radio host Michael Harris said on Mike Duffy Live that former Ontario cabinet minister Bob Runciman once said to him that crime is an issue between elections but has no traction during the campaign.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:27 PM

 
How much does this help the Tories?

TSE makes a big comeback today: 9.82% or 890.50 points.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:08 PM

 
What?

Mike Duffy just called Elizabeth May 'the dynamic leader' of the Greens.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:08 PM

 
TVO's The Agenda

Topic: In praise of the intelligent voter. A bit misleading (kicked off with the idea that you need a license to do a lot of things (hunt, drive, sell food, etc...) but not to vote) because the real topic is elitism versus populism. But the idea of the responsibility of the voter is a good one, albeit one that seldom gets explored. Added bonus: Professor Clifford Orwin is one of the panelists.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:05 PM

 
Blogging tonight

I'll be live blogging the election, flipping furiously among the TV channels and clicking even more furiously among the internet sites, to heap scorn on everyone. There will be generous offerings of sarcasm and incredulity.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:44 PM

 
Election losers

Hacks and Wonks says that all the federal leaders save Gilles Duceppe come out of tonight as losers. I totally agree. For one it will matter a lot(Stephane Dion), for another it won't matter at all(Jack Layton) and for one (Stephen Harper), it probably won't make much a difference. I can't see the Tories pushing Harper out the door unless he loses seats and even then I'm not sure who would be doing the pushing. Over the weekend I cleaned up some of my old files of newspaper clippings from 2001-2004 and the conventional wisdom then was that Harper was going to keep the Conservative leadership warm until someone, perhaps 5-10 years down the road, could bring the party back into power. The fact is, Harper has far exceeded expectations and maneuvered himself as the sole leader of not just the Conservative Party but the conservative movement. That won't last forever, it might not even last long, but there isn't anyone that can challenge him for that position in the foreseeable future. So perhaps the big election loser is the conservative movement, stuck with a leader who will say or do anything to get elected; or, put more correctly, a leader who won't say anything or do anything to get elected.

I don't see Layton being harmed by holding his own for the same reason: who is going to challenge him? The NDP are rebuilding in Ontario, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, and the prospects are better there for would-be leaders. And you can't count on Layton leaving on his own; what else would he do? Pretending to lead a political party is so much more fun than teaching political science at Ryerson.

I don't see Dion surviving unless he wins. His name is dirt and there are many ambitious Liberals in caucus (and maybe even out of caucus). Furthermore, I don't see him wanting to stay. I doubt he has it in him to survive the type of YouTube pillorying he took in the past week. And if he doesn't want to exit the political stage, at some point his family needs to talk to him and say "it isn't going to get any better than this." Or perhaps his daughter can explain that our lives aren't really the dreams of a horse.

I'll let Hacks and Wonks handle Green leader Elizabeth May:

"She'll spin it as a victory when they receive about 7% of the votes, but she's made bad decisions during her tenure as Green Party Leader, be they on riding choice, platform, cozying up to Dion. It will be interesting to see how she accepts the results and what direction both she and the party choose to proceed on."

If I was a Green Party member, I'd be furious with her support of strategic voting to defeat the Tories instead of hammering away at the need to increase the Green vote total. But she can point to anything over 6-7% as a victory for the cause. The question is, does it matter? Probably not. The Green tide has probably subsided and nobody was going to capitalize on The Issue of 2007 in the election of October 2008.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:20 PM

 
Thanksgiving panda?

That's the message I get from vegetarian Rondi Adamson's post.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:26 PM

 
David Frum gets pissy with critics

Again, proving why he has become unreadable -- even when, like a stopped clock, he happens to be right.
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:54 PM

 
Voting is irrational,
Or why I'm better than you because I stayed home

I have never felt bad about spoiling or refusing my ballot, or as I am doing today, staying home. Voting is irrational. Tim Harford makes the point in The Logic of Life and Don Butler has a long piece in the Ottawa Citizen on this theme. Butler writes:

"In the 2006 federal election, just six ridings were decided by margins of less than one per cent. The closest was Parry Sound-Muskoka, where Conservative Tony Clement unseated Liberal Andy Mitchell by 28 votes. Voters there -- those who backed Mr. Clement, at least -- might rationally conclude their votes made a difference.

For most of us, though, our votes simply add to a winning candidate's comfortable margin of victory, or provide cold comfort to those who fall short.

Given that, says Scott Matthews, an assistant professor in Queen's University's political studies department, 'it's a real puzzle that anyone bothers to vote.'

According to rational choice theory, the cost to an individual of voting -- boning up on party platforms, attending all-candidates meetings, taking the time to cast a ballot -- far outweighs the probability that his or her vote will be decisive.

As a result, rational choice theory 'makes a strong prediction that the level of turnout should generally be zero in large electorates,' Mr. Matthews says."

But even in Clement's riding, no single person's vote mattered. (Nor would a single vote have mattered in Florida in 2000.) The chances that an election will depend on a single vote are almost incalculably small. There are other reasons for voting -- like giving to charity, voting makes people feel good about themselves. But is that a good reason to vote? Sure, why not, but it is no better than not voting.

As for the idea that if you don't vote you don't get to complain, I think this is bass-ackwards. By voting you agree to accept the results -- this is the very basis of the legitimacy of democracy. By not voting, I reserve the right to say I don't accept the results, that the system is rigged in favour of politicians and against the people, and that everything is going to hell in a handcart. By voting you are only encouraging politicians to continue acting like they do: irresponsibly, with an eye toward re-election rather than addressing real issues.

UPDATE: 11:08 AM: I don't begrudge those who have experience with communist regimes valuing the vote. But I still don't buy the argument that just because some people have been denied the right to vote (or not vote), I should cheapen myself by giving my vote to the winner of the contest to the bottom we call democracy.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:27 AM

 
My Canada election prediction

I had to revise my election predictions because my math was wrong. I subtracted a Liberal. The changes are also reflected in yesterday's election prediction post.

Conservatives - 141
Liberals - 86
Bloc Quebecois - 47
NDP - 32
Independents - 2
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:17 AM

 
AGS revisited

New Orleans Saints 34, Oakland Raiders 3: Saints dominated, controlling possession for 36:12, with 441 total net yards and Drew Brees completing 26 of 30 passes (including his first 16) for 319 yards. RB Reggie Bush had two TDs. I predicted the Saints would beat the seven-point spread.

New York Jets 26, Cincinatti Bengals 14: Jets led 17-14 at the half because of an interception return in the first minute of the game and a blown call on a TD pass in the final seconds of the second quarter. Otherwise, it wasn't really close. Correctly predicted Jets would beat the six-point spread.

Tampa Bay Bucaneers 27, Carolina Panthers 3: Bucs opened up quickly, going into half-time 17-3. Panthers QB Jake Delhomme threw two picks. I thought Panthers would upset Tampa because of their superior defense. Oops.

Houston Texans 29, Miami Dolphins 28: I said Houston would win but not beat the three-point spread. A three-yard run by Texans QB Matt Schaub in the final two minutes gave the Texans their first victory of the year. They would have never been in position to score if Andre Johnson didn't make an incredible 23-yard catch on fourth-and-ten in the final drive.

Indianapolis Colts 31, Baltimore Ravens 3: I thought that Indy would win but wouldn't beat the 4.5 spread of the combination of Colts injuries and Ravens defense. Indy was up 24-0 in the first half and never looked back. Ravens QB Joe Flacco threw three interceptions.

Atlanta Falcons 22, Chicago Bears 20: The Falcons had just 39 first-half running yards, including a 23 yard play by Michael Turner, but went into the second half with a 12-3 lead. Bears roared back and appeared to win with a TD with 11 seconds left in the game. Jason Elam hit a 48 yard field goal to pull of the win. I predicted the Bears would win.

St. Louis Rams 19, Washington Redskins 17: I joined nearly all of football punditry in predicting the Skins would beat the 13.5-point spread. Skins had three fumble turnovers and Rams made them pay for it, but still needed a field goal on the final second of the game to win.

Minnesota Vikings 13, Detroit Lions 10: I said Minny wouldn't beat the nearly impossible 13.5-point spread, but didn't think that it would be this close. Vikings needed a Ryan Longwell field goal with nine seconds left in the game for the victory. Lions QB Dan Orlovsky, in his sixth NFL game and first start, gave up a first quarter safety when he unnecessarily stepped out of bounds of the end zone. That two points made the difference.

Jacksonville Jaguars 24, Denver Broncos 17: I incorrectly predicted a Denver victory. A Denver TD in the final minute makes this game look closer than it really was.

Arizona Cardinals 30, Dallas Cowboys 24 (OT): I thought the Boys would win. Cardinals became the first team to ever win an OT game by scoring a TD on a blocked punt. Tony Romo had a great game (24/38, 321 yards, 3 TDs) and broke a finger that will keep him out of action for a month.

Philadelphia Eagles 40, San Francisco 49ers 26: San Fran blew a 26-17 lead going into the fourth. Correctly predicted the Eagles beating the five-point spread thanks to a 23 point fourth.

Green Bay Packers 27, Seattle Seahawks 17: I predicted the Packers upset. Everyone contributed to Green Bay's victory (Ryan Grant had 33 rushes for 90 yards, Greg Jennings and Donald Driver each had at least five receptions and at least 53 yards) while 'Hawks backup Charlie Frye passed for just 64 yards.

San Diego Chargers 30, New England Patriots 10: I thought the Bolts would win but not cover the five-point spread. QB Philip Rivers had a great game for SD: 18-27, 306 yards, 3 TDs, and four players had catches of at least 24 yards.

Cleveland Browns 35, New York Giants 14: Me and the whole world was wrong picking the Giants. The 1-4 Browns beat the unbeaten Giants playing New York's game: a nice mix of offense with runs, short passes and long throws, combined with a tight defense. Eli Manning threw three picks which didn't help the Giants' cause.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:30 AM

 
My Canada election prediction

Revised numbers: My math was off, so I subtracted a Liberal.

Conservatives - 141
Liberals - 86
Bloc Quebecois - 47
NDP - 32
Independents - 2

Here are 14 ridings I think the Tories pick up:

Madawaska-Restigouche (New Brunswick) -- It was close in '06 and Atlantic Canadians like their handouts.

Kenora (Ontario) -- Vote buying works.

Brant (Ontario) -- Natural Conservative riding. Bye-bye Lloyd St. Amand.

Newmarket-Aurora (Ontario) -- No Belinda, no Liberal. The riding is far away enough from Toronto, and white enough, for the Conservatives to win.

Oakville (Ontario) -- Should be a Conservative riding and Oakville residents seem like exactly the kind of voters who find Stephane Dion a major turn off.

Halton (Ontario) -- Lisa Raitt is a great candidate (former head of the Toronto Port Authority) who defeats Garth Turner as Halton voters rid themselves of their embarrassment.

Huron-Bruce (Ontario) -- Popular pro-life, anti-gun control Liberal Paul Steckle retires. Conservatives win handily.

Mississauga South (Ontario) -- Paul Szabo finally bites the dust. Stephane Dion doesn't go over well in the Slavic communities and working middle class neighbourhoods that have traditionally supported Szabo.

Saint Boniface (Manitoba) -- I think the Tories are picking up a seat in Manitoba and this one makes the most sense.

North Vancouver (British Columbia) -- Don Bell is dragged down by Dion.

West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country (British Columbia) -- Newly minted Green MP Blair Wilson loses his seat to John Weston, who nearly beat Wilson when he was the Liberal candidate. Vote splitting by progressives helps Weston and the Tories.

Richmond (British Columbia) -- Raymond Chan loses. Again.

Surrey North (British Columbia) -- The controversy of Dona Cadman notwithstanding, Surrey North returns to the Tory fold.

Vancouver Island North (British Columbia) -- John Duncan recaptures his old seat.

The Tories will lose a handful of seats (will lose two of three Newfoundland seats, and perhaps up to a pair of incumbents in BC, maybe Oshawa or St. Catharines or Essex) but the Conservatives can make most of these up in Quebec (pick up 2-5 seats) and maybe a win in Guelph (Ontario).
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:39 PM

 
Why I won't vote on Tuesday

I don't like to vote. It makes me feel dirty. Considering that all government is theft (the taking of my income, my freedom) I don't really relish the idea of choosing who gets to rob me.

Here's another reason not to vote: I don't want any of the political parties to get the $1.75 (or more after inflation) for up to five years, for every vote they get in this election. I don't necessarily have a problem with this system, but I do when I consider another fact: I can't sell my vote. It is offensive that I can't get a dime for my vote but that the political parties can get up $8.75 when I put a check by one of their candidate's names on the ballot. So, to be clear, I can't profit from my vote but politicians can. This is what happens when you let politicians make the rules. My question for candidates and Elections Canada: how is this fair?
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:33 PM

 
Paul Krugman wins Nobel Economics Prize

George Will once said that Milton Friedman was a much better economist than political commentator but that unfortunately most of Friedman's Newsweek columns focused on political matters rather than economic ones. One could say the same thing about Paul Krugman, whose anti-Bush New York Times columns are horrid but whose economic work was important within the field, especially on international trade theory and the effects of location. Tyler Cowen has a long post on Krugman's deserved reward, although like Cowen I am surprised at the timing (this year rather than after President Bush left office). Read also Edward L. Glaeser and Arnold Kling. Avinash Dixit has a longish paper that looks at the economic theories of Krugman. Of special note is that the Nobel Prize committee recognized Krugman for ""for his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity" not his recent less rigorous and less convincing work on inequality.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:22 PM

 
I don't get the criticism

I don't get the cricitism of the media. Greg Staples says that the question that tripped up Stephane Dion was poorly worded and should have been re-phrased. Not really. This is a common type of question and the pointy-headed pol didn't understand it. It's not the reporter's fault that Dion is an idiot. I feel sorry for the idiot, but he is still an idiot. He wants to answer the question like an academic: "If I prime minister two years ago I would have done this and there wouldn't be a problem today because our policies would do X, Y or Z to prevent this from being a problem." Or, "If I was prime minister two weeks ago, this is what I would have done," or "In two weeks, once I'm elected ..." But that isn't what the media or the public is looking for. They just want to know what, as prime minister facing this economic turbulence right now, what would Dion do. The question didn't get into that level of detail, but anyone running for political office knows what the short-hand question meant. It is a common question; that Dion didn't get it shows that he doesn't have a political bone in his body.
posted by Paul Tuns at 3:05 PM

 
John Lennon: a bigger creep than we thought

"Woman please let me explain,
I never meant to cause you sorrow or pain,
So let me tell you again and again and again,
I love you (yeah, yeah) now and forever."
-- 'Woman', John Lennon

The New York Post reports that a new biography of the dead Beatle (which Yoko Ono cooperated with) "chronicles [Lennon's] callous treatment of Yoko, the physical and verbal abuse of his two sons, and his chronic infidelities." The Post article has a number of disturbing anecdotes related by Philip Norman in John Lennon: The Life about the star's sexual appetite and clumsy come-ons to women.

Here are two, as reported by the Post:

"Norman writes about the moment when Cynthia, Lennon's first wife, discovered his affair with Yoko.

When Cynthia returned from a vacation in Greece to her home in England, she found John and Yoko seated on the floor together in matching bathrobes.

"John showed no sign of guilt or even surprise, merely looking round with a casual, "Oh . . . hi",' Norman writes."

And:

"[T]he songwriter's first pass at Yoko isn't what love songs are made of.

Yoko was "deeply offended" by Lennon's cheap maneuvering at a party, where he commented that she looked tired and suggested that she 'lie down,' writes Norman.

'One of the Beatles' entourage then drove the two of them to a nearby flat and, without preamble, began folding out a sofa into a bed. It was clearly an established procedure for John's conquests'."

There's also a story about Lennon making out with a woman at a party with Yoko Ono in the next room.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:49 PM

 
Term limits

George Will has a good column on Michael Bloomberg wanting to exceed his two-term limit on being mayor and how politicians in general don't like being denied permanent incumbency. After examining the dishonest arguments term limit critics put up in the mouths of proponents, Will concludes: [T]he political class's reaction to term limits is a powerful, indeed sufficient, argument for them."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:44 PM

 
Will Harper have Dion to kick around for a few more years

Stephane Dion says he has no plans to step down if he doesn't win on Tuesday. He might be thinking that not getting his butt handed back to him and the Liberals surviving to fight another day is a moral victory. The question is not whether Dion wants to stay on as leader, but whether he will be pushed out by the Russian Count (Michael Ignatieff) or erstwhile socialist (Bob Rae).
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:05 PM

 
The unseriousness of Elizabeth May

CTV reports:

"Green Party Leader Elizabeth May won't parachute into a riding won by a Green candidate should she fail to unseat Conservative rival Peter MacKay...

'We'll have a lot of MPs and I'm not going to ask them to surrender their seats,' May said."

She named Guelph, Vancouver Centre, Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound and Nanaimo-Alberni as ridings the Greens might win.

And the sane side of May's pitch is this argument against well-liked Tory candidates, like her own opponent, Peter MacKay: "This argument that you have a seat at the table, I mean there's no table, just Stephen Harper."
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:02 PM

 
Any given Sunday










Oakland Raiders at New Orleans Saints: Saints QB Drew Brees is leading the best passing game in the NFL, despite numerous injuries to the New Orleans offense. The Raiders have a new coach and it will take some time to implement a new plan, but with the Saints weak run defense, expect Oakland to run (to both advance the ball and keep Brees off the field). Saints might not be good enough to beat the seven-point spread, but the Raiders are definitely bad enough to lose by that much.

Cincinatti Bengals at New York Jets: Brett Favre is finally passing and the Jets have had two weeks to prepare for this game. The Bengals are the king of suck. According to Football Outsiders, the Jets have the fourth best defense in the first half but 29th ranked defense in the second half. If his inflamed elbow lets him, expect Carson Palmer to get the Bengals back into the game before coming up short. Jets win and beat the six-point spread.

Carolina Panthers at Tampa Bay Bucaneers: The Cats have won five in a row in Tampa. Their records (4-1 and 3-2 respectively) indicate this is a close match-up, but the Panthers' strengths should neutralize the Bucs' strong game components. The Panthers defense has stopped the running game all year long, including the likes of LaDainian Tomlinson (San Diego Chargers), Adrian Peterson (Minnesota Vikings), Michael Turner (Atlanta Falcons), Larry Johnson (Kansas City Chiefs) and Matt Forte (Chicago Bears). The Bucs rely on their running offense, so the Panthers are expected to minimize Tampa's offensive chances. The Panthers' pass defense is even better and neither Tampa QB (Jeff Garcia or Brian Griese) inspires confidence. Carolina's Jake Delhomme is an efficient play-caller and their running game, with the RB duo of DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart, is very good. Furthermore, the Panthers have allowed the smallest percentage of red zone drives in the NFL; Carolina has allowed just five TDs in the past four games. Tampa is favoured by 1.5, but the Panthers will win.

Miami Dolphins at Houston Texans: Is the idea that the 0-4 Texans are 'due' an actual argument? Lots of football pundits are using it. The Dolphins have won two in a row -- against the Chargers and Patriots no less. As The Sporting News has noted, the Fins have won with "a power running game, efficient passing game, and much-improved defense." That's a winning combo. But the Texans can be expected to figure out how to stop Ronnie Brown and win one at home. Houston wins but doesn't beat the three-point spread.

Baltimore Ravens at Indianapolis Colts: The Ravens have a great offense. The Colts have injuries. The Colts have Peyton Manning to pull them out of the fire in the final minutes. Quick: name the Ravens QB. Indy wins using lots of targets (Dallas Clark, Anthony Gonzalez, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne), but doesn't beat the 4.5-point spread.

Chicago Bears at Atlanta Falcons: Who would have guessed that both these teams would be over 500 in the sixth week? The Falcons 3-2 record is a bit of mirage, with their victories coming against the lowly Detroit Lions and KC Chiefs, and an injured Green Bay Packers squad. The Bears have a more balanced offense with QB Kyle Orton throwing at least a pair of TD passes in each of the past three games. RB Matt Forte provided a spark in the running game early on but has rushed for a combined 67 yards over the past two games. Rookie Falcons QB Matt Ryan has been competent and RB Michael Turner has been a pleasant surprise. But the Bears defense is excellent at stopping the running game. Bears will beat the three-point spread.

St. Louis Rams at Washington Redskins: The Redskins have looked great in their past four games, in no small part because they have allowed just one turnover in five games. The Rams are comprehensively awful. New coach Jim Haslett gave former starting QB Marc Bulger his old job back. Probably won't make a difference. Skins win and should beat the 13.5-point spread.

Detroit Lions at Minnesota Vikings: The Lions might be the only team as bad as the Rams. The Vikes have been disappointing, but should have no problem with the Lions. They can beat the Lions with both the running game (Adrian Peterson) and passing game (Bernard Berrian), but the 13.5 point spread is a lot. I wouldn't bet on the Vikes covering the spread.

Jacksonville Jaguars at Denver Broncos: Jax has a good defense and the Broncs have a great offense. Jax has no offense and the Broncs have less than no defense. The Broncos are a little banged up (rookie WR Eddie Royal is out) and the Jags are a physical team, but Jax is more banged up. Jags RBs Fred Taylor and Maurice Jones-Drew haven't really gotten their act together yet. Denver wins but don't cover the 3.5 point spread.

Dallas Cowboys at Arizona Cardinals: The battle of two great passing QBs: Tony Romo for the Cowboys, Kurt Warner for the Cards. Warner still has lots of weapons even with WR Anquan Boldin out after that horrible collision against the Jets two weeks ago. CB Terence Newman and SS Roy Williams are out of the Boys defense, so Warner will feel free to pass lots, especially to Larry Fitzgerald. Cowboys have four receiving targets and the added weapon of a superior running game when they remember to use it. Dallas needs to use RBs Marion Barber and Felix Jones to keep Warner on the bench. Cowboys are favoured by five and the pundits are split. I say the Boys beat it -- if they employ both the air and ground games.

Philadelphia Eagles at San Francisco 49ers: The blitzing defense of Philly will pressure San Fran QB J.T. O'Sullivan, which means the Niners will go to RB Frank Gore again and again. According to Football Outsiders, the Eagles have the third best offense in the first half of the game but only the 23rd best offense in the second half. But that is with RB Brian Westbrook, who is out with a rib injury. Eagles are favoured by five; seems reasonable, especially if QB Donovan McNabb comes up big, like he can.

Green Bay Packers at Seattle Seahawks: Take your pick: the battle of teams coached by Paul Holmgren or the battle of teams that are having disappointing seasons. Packers defense is wracked by injuries. Both QBs (Aaron Rodgers for the Packers, Matt Hasselbeck for the Hawks) are injured although Rodgers is more likely to play. A healthy receiving corps will help the Seahawks. Seattle is favoured by two, but the Packers will upset the Hawks with Green Bay's top-ranked red-zone defense preventing Seattle from scoring and Seattle's sub-par defense not getting in the way of Rodgers passing the ball to Greg Jennings and Donald Driver.

New England Patriots at San Diego Chargers: Injuries have affected both these teams, but the Pats problems have mostly been on defense. As Matt Cassel and Randy Moss begin to connect, the defensive weaknesses might be less of a factor. But that time is not yet. The Chargers are a superior team, starting with the QB position. Philip Rivers has a 103 passer rating, 11 TD passes and 1183 yards for the Bolts; Cassel has an 84.1 passer rating, 3 TD passes and 707 yards for the Pats (in one less game). But Philips is barely making 50% of his passes in the past two games. The O-line is a problem for New England, allowing 15 sacks of Cassel in four games. The 2-3 Chargers have been in this position before; last year they started 2-3 and ended up winning the AFC West. The Chargers have lots of offensive weapons including WR Vincent Jackson, TE Antonio Gates, RB LaDainian Tomlinson, although they will miss WR Chris Chambers. The defense is coming together. New England, on the other hand, is as good as anyone exploiting opponents' weaknesses. The Chargers are favoured by five. Bolts win but not by the margin.

New York Giants at Cleveland Browns: The Giants are doing better than most people predicted; the Browns are doing worse than many would have guessed. Eli Manning is consistently good and the defense is consistently great. WR Plaxico Burress returns from his one game suspension. Cleveland's offense has been anemic, but they'll have WR Donte Stallworth healthy for the first time this season. Cleveland's defense needs to pressure Manning, but the Browns have just six sacks all year. Giants beat the 7.5-point spread.

Byes:

Buffalo Bills: After starting 4-0, they had high hopes of going into bye-week a perfect 5-0, but got trounced 41-17 in Arizona after starting QB Trent Edwards got knocked out of the game early. Three of their next four games are against division rivals. This is a critical time to regroup.

Kansas City Chiefs: Will anyone notice that they are not playing.

Pittsburgh Steelers: If the offensive line isn't going to provide a respite from the hits, the week off will provide relief to Steelers' QB Ben Roethlisberger.

Tennessee Titans: The 5-0 Titans need the break to rest their dominating defense.
posted by Paul Tuns at 2:43 PM

 
More on the BC HRT decision on Steyn/Maclean's

Blazing Cat Fur rounds up the responses.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:00 PM

 
Mark Steyn & Maclean's 'not guilty'

So says the BC Human Rights Tribunal. Mark Steyn comments:

"Their Marsupial Majesties at the British Columbia "Human Rights" Tribunal have dismissed El-Mo's complaint against Maclean's and voted unanimously to acquit the hatemongers."

Kathy Shaidle, co-author of The Tyranny of Nice, the book on HRCs, has everything here, including numerous links and Interim Publishing's press release. The takeaway point in the press release:

"Unfortunately, this decision is only a partial victory for Mark Steyn, Maclean's magazine and every other writer and publisher in Canada.

This Kafkaesque trial cost taxpayers dearly, while many Canadians struggle to make ends meet.

More importantly, it cost Canada its international reputation as a free, just and tolerant country. While Steyn and Maclean's won, most defendants are found guilty; the HRCs boast of a nearly 100% rate of conviction."

The decision is here.

Deborah Gyapong hits the nail on the head when she says that Mark Steyn and Maclean's won because they were Mark Steyn and Maclean's.

Also, Andrew Coyne explains why this "good news" is not that great: "[I]t is no victory to be told by a shadowy government agency that you will be permitted to publish."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:04 PM

 
Food prices/supply

Just three months ago, all the news was about the difficulty in feeding the world's population. That was overblown but food scarcity was (and is) still a problem. Juan Delgado and Indhira Santos have an important paper on ensuring global food supplies that is worth reading. This paragraph is vital, though:

"Food security does not mean self-sufficiency. In a world of global scarcity, we need to make the best use of land and other resources. This implies producing where it is most efficient as well as liberalising trade so that accurate price signals can be sent worldwide and so products can reach markets. Global integration, not regionalism, is the way to make the most from scarce resources."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:51 PM

 
This should be good news for Harper

More than 107,000 news jobs in September -- the largest one month gain in more than three decades. TD Economics explains the significance and the key fact for me is that more than half of the additional jobs were in the private sector. Media will certainly focus on how more than half of the new jobs are part-time. Better to be employed part-time than unemployed full-time. Speaking of which, in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario, the number of unemployed and the unemployment rate went up slightly.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:04 AM

 
Brooks on Republicans

New York Times columnist David Brooks is a 50-50 columnists. Half the time he is bang-on, and half the time he is off. Of the 50% of the time he is wrong, half the time he is egregiously wrong, half the time he just misses because his propensity for being too cute gets the better of him.) Today he seems bang-on:

"What had been a disdain for liberal intellectuals slipped into a disdain for the educated class as a whole. The liberals had coastal condescension, so the conservatives developed their own anti-elitism, with mirror-image categories and mirror-image resentments, but with the same corrosive effect.

Republicans developed their own leadership style. If Democratic leaders prized deliberation and self-examination, then Republicans would govern from the gut.

The political effects of this trend have been obvious. Republicans have alienated the highly educated regions — Silicon Valley, northern Virginia, the suburbs outside of New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and Raleigh-Durham. The West Coast and the Northeast are mostly gone...

The Republicans have alienated whole professions. Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it’s 2-to-1. With tech executives, it’s 5-to-1. With investment bankers, it’s 2-to-1. It took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community...

And so, politically, the G.O.P. is squeezed at both ends. The party is losing the working class by sins of omission — because it has not developed policies to address economic anxiety. It has lost the educated class by sins of commission — by telling members of that class to go away."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:05 AM

 
Robson on the Canadian election

John Robson writes in the Ottawa Citizen:

"Thus this election confronts me with a new version of a familiar dilemma. It's not that I'm puzzled how to vote when my ballot seems unlikely to be decisive nationally or even in my riding; that's normal. Nor is it how to vote 'strategically'; all voting is strategic. The novel problem is finding a sensible strategy for voting for decency, since no party has attractive policies and all have a repellent political style. I would sooner watch crows squabble over road kill for two hours than our leaders at a table interrupting, talking over one another and jabbing fingers incessantly."

And Robson's advice for voting on October 14:

"Yes, our politics is disgusting. To help clean it up, on Oct. 14 vote for the person in your riding you expect is most dismayed not at their opponents' vitriol, but at the sludge pouring out of their own camp."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:01 AM

 
Mark Steyn today

On the BC HRC decision expected today:

"In a lame attempt to piggyback (kangaback?) off the Tyranny Of Nice book launch, the British Columbia "Human Rights" Tribunal will announce its verdict in the Maclean's case at 12 noon Pacific Kangaroo Time today. I'll be standing by to do live interviews with the CBC et al, only to find they've all left the office early for the three-day Canadian Thanksgiving weekend, and by the time they return to work it'll be election fever in Ottawa and nothing else will get a look in. So the kangaroos look like achieving their wish of disappearing the case down the old memory hole. Heigh-ho. Notwithstanding the diabolical timing, we'll be reporting the verdict live."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:57 AM

 
One person's loss...

In times of non-confidence in the banks, the sale of residential safes increase. And one safe maker expects demand to grow.
posted by Paul Tuns at 5:17 PM

 
Baseball predictions

You would think I would learn. I went 1-4 in the divisional series, although I wasn't surprised the Dodgers' 'upset' of the Cubs.

So here goes another round of guess work.

National League:

Los Angeles Dodgers over the Philadelphia Phillies 4-2

Jerry Manuel's reluctance to use ace pitcher Cole Hamels on three days rest is a huge disadvantage because there is very little on this pitching staff after him in the rotation.

American League:

Boston Red Sox over the Tampa Bay Rays 4-2

The Rays have the regular season edge (10-8) but the Red Sox are as complete a team in baseball. The Sox are a much better hitting team and have a slightly better rotation but have the inferior bullpen before they get to the closer. Sox manager Terry Francona has a better bench to exploit advantages.

World Series:

Dodgers over Red Sox 4-3

Joe Torre's tean rides the strength of Manny Ramirez's bat and Jonathan Broxton's arm in relief to beat the superior team. Practically a homecoming for the Dodgers when they travel to Bean Town (Man Ram, Nomar Garciaparra, Derek Lowe).
posted by Paul Tuns at 5:07 PM

 
Tyranny of Nice update































Read about The Tyranny of Nice at Steynonline. You can buy the book from Steyn's bookstore, either by itself or with Steyn's America Alone, the hate tome that made human rights commissions front page news.

Also, you can listen to the co-authors at Pajamas Media.
posted by Paul Tuns at 5:03 PM

 
Comments

Send them to paul_tuns[AT]yahoo.com.

I'll probably have an omnibus response to some common complaints/inquiries over about posts, within a day or so.
posted by Paul Tuns at 5:38 PM

 
See a pattern?

Angus Reid Global Strategies polls released October 8th:

Missouri: Obama 50%, McCain 47%
New Hampshire: Obama 53%, McCain 40%
New York: Obama 58%, McCain 36%
North Carolina: Obama 50%, McCain 44%
Virginia: Obama 50%, McCain 48%
Florida: Obama 52%, McCain 45%
Ohio: Obama 53%, McCain 43%
Colorado: Obama 51%, McCain 45%
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:18 PM

 
Disappearing animals
















I like animals. I plan family trips to places with good zoos as much for my personal enjoyment as for my kids. I have always liked nature shows. I am fascinated by zebras, lemurs, tapirs, okapis, tigers and crocodiles. I can watch the fish in an aquarium for hours. But other than the sense of loss of these beautiful (usually) creatures, I don't get why the disappearance of particular animals matters. Biodiversity is a 'nice' not an 'essential'. So this news from the AP leaves me ho-hum:

"The Rameshwaram parachute spider has been listed as critically endangered due to habitat loss...

In Costa Rica, Holdridge's toad moved from critically endangered to extinct, as it has not been seen since 1986 despite intensive surveys.

La Palma giant lizard, found on the Canary Island of La Palma and thought to have become extinct in the last 500 years, was rediscovered last year and is now listed as critically endangered."

Unfortunate, but hardly distressing.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:59 AM

 
Not really

Toronto Star headline: "It's Ignatieff vs. Boyer in tight race." I doubt it. The Tories have a 5,000-vote deficit to overcome with their Kim Campbell relic. Not a tight race.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:05 AM

 
Criticizing Harper by invoking someone most people have never heard of

Toronto Star: "Layton compares Harper's words to R.B. Bennett."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:56 AM

 
Boring, phony debates

Mark Steyn in The Corner:

"That's a lobby group I can get behind. Mark Levin's point that McCain "doesn't flat-out lie the way Obama does" is a way of acknowledging that the stilted artificial formats of these debates principally benefits the Democrat. Most electoral seasons the Democrat candidate has to pass himself off as something other than what his record would suggest — tough on foreign policy issues, deeply personally passionately personally anguished on abortion, etc. These stilted non-debates assist the Dem in getting away with it. Mixing it up, direct challenges between candidates, etc would not only make for better viewing but diminish this season's Democratic northern liberal from passing himself off as a moderate centrist champing at the bit to "kill" bin Laden and "destroy" al-Qaeda."

And this is why 1) debates don't really matter, 2) people don't watch them, and 3) politics is boring and people don't vote.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:35 AM

 
Political anagram

A commenter at No Left Turns notes that McCain-Palin is an anagram for "I am a CNN clip."
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:11 AM

 
Why don't the parties sell the broadcast rights for their conventions?

Just like the Olympics do. Good question by Ian Ayres at Freakonomics. The money that is raised can help fund the campaigns. The idea is explored further in a column Ayres has co-written in Forbes, where he acknowledges some of the pitfalls.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:06 AM

 
Go big or go home. Or go big and still go home

Jack Kemp and Peter Ferrara make the case for bold tax reform as a saving issue for the McCain campaign. I'm for the suggested change (I'm always for tax reductions and tax simplicity), but it won't matter; it's too late in the game to introduce new ideas, or even revitalize old ones. An optional, flatter tax system is a good reform but Kemp and Ferrara are wrong to think that this can successfully "refocus his campaign." Anything McCain does now, from attack ads to new policies, will be read as "desperate McCain does X to salvage his losing campaign." The issue will be framed not as tax reform but a campaign tactic.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:58 AM

 
What each Canadian party leader needs to do

With one week to go until the Canadian election, here is my unsolicited advice. These arguments are not necessarily true or virtuous, but that doesn't matter. They are believable or speak to a certain kind of voter who might be susceptible to their plausibility. Winning votes is about providing a narrative that voters can buy into. The suggested talking points below do just that.

So much of this election has been bland, dealing with personalities, code words for ambiguous ideas (like leadership) and the addressing issues only at the margins. That's fine, that's what politics is all about now. Modest but uninspired. The results, predictably, will be modest and uninspiring.

My advice for the leaders, however, is that rather than playing it safe for the final week, to make a big push to strengthen their hand after the October 14 election. I doubt any of them will take such a chance. People are usually not chastised for playing it safe, but they are lambasted for doing anything bold -- at least when it doesn't work out. But playing it safe means the likely election result will disappoint all the leaders, other than Gilles Duceppe, who doesn't count.

So here is my advice.

Stephen Harper (Conservative): Make the case for a majority. "In these times of economic uncertainty, Canadians need a strong majority because Parliament must be ready to act decisively. But without a majority, a Conservatives government will be pre-occupied with the politics of keeping Parliament afloat rather than addressing the urgent needs of Canadians. Allow us to put the interests of Canadians ahead of petty politics by delivering a majority you can trust to get the job done."

Stephane Dion (Liberal): Go to church and pray for a miracle. There is nothing else left to do if the goal to merely maintain the size of the current caucus; anything more ambitious than that would require divine intervention. So the real goal is to keep losses to a minimum. Here's the case that needs to be made. "I will not be around for the next election. That much is obvious. We have a great team in the Liberal Party and one of those other team members will be the next Liberal leader. Give them something to work with by returning as many Liberal candidates as possible." This is counter-intuitive, but it stresses the Liberal brand and de-emphasizes the party's biggest weakness (Dion).

Jack Layton (NDP): Make the case for a principled opposition that will not have the distractions the Liberals will be encumbered by over the next 12-18 months. "Many Canadians do not trust the Harper Conservatives, but are having trouble figuring out which opposition party to vote for. The Green Party is not going to elect MPs, the Bloc are a bunch of separatists and the Liberals have propped up the Conservative government for nearly three years. More importantly, however, the Liberals are going to have a leadership race when Stephane Dion steps down, probably within six months of this election. The Liberal Party will be distracted from the vital job of keeping the Conservative government accountable while they figure out who their new leader will be. Vote for the NDP to protect the interests of the majority of Canadians who will not vote for the Conservatives on October 14."

Gilles Duceppe(BQ): Do whatever it is you are doing to feed the distrust and discontent over the Tories; it seems to be working.

Elizabeth May (Green): Figure out if you are the leader of a movement or a party. If you are the leader of the movement, step down as leader of the Green Party but continue doing what you have been doing: hammer the Harper Conservatives and work with the most electable alternative to them. But if you are a political leader, lead your party. "I made a mistake in suggesting that Canadians who care about climate change should vote for the most electable candidate who is not a Conservative. I didn't have the faith in my candidates and party that, according to the polls, so many voters seem to have. We do not need to elect MPs to make a big difference, we only need to send Ottawa a strong signal that Canadians care about their environment. Sadly, there has not been enough debate about the environment during this campaign. The other parties are not serious about raising the issue or providing solutions. A Green vote on October 14 will be heard by all the other parties, including the Conservatives, that the environment can no longer be ignored by our political leaders."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:13 PM

 
Interim report card on parties and leaders

It is available here through the Campaign Life Coalition website.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:16 PM

 
What I'm reading

1. The Harper Record edited by Teresa Healy. The book is also available from the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives website. It is exactly what you would think it is considering the source (the CCPA). You can access individual chapters here.

2. "In Pursuit of Happiness Research: Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy?"
by Will Wilkinson. This Cato Institute Policy Analysis Paper is from 2007 but I've begun digging around this particular issue: can happiness be quantified and if it can (or can't) what are the public policy implications.

3. "Tom Davis Gives Up," in this past weekend's New York Times Magazine. The senior GOP Congressman is retiring and the story largely makes the Washington D.C. of recent years a lamentable place. That might be so. But no one should lament Davis' retirement from elected politics, as he was (by his own inadvertent admission) part of the problem.

4. The cover story of the current Newsweek: "The Palin Problem." The introductory blurb says: "Yes, she won the debate by not imploding. But governing requires knowledge, and mindless populism is just that—mindless." Also in Newsweek is Francis Fukuyama's longish piece, "The Fall of America, Inc.," declaring U.S.-style capitalism dead.

5. "The Hidden Costs of Single Payer Health Insurance: A Comparison of the United States and Canada," by Brett J. Skinner, Mark Rovere and Marisha Warrington. This is the latest health care study from the Fraser Institute.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:10 AM

 
Happiness blogger echoes Thaler

Gretchen Rubin of The Happiness Project says the same thing about investing that Richard Thaler did to Business Week. Rubin says: "Constantly checking the stock market does not bring happiness."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:07 AM

 
AGS revisited

Tennessee Titans 13, Baltimore Ravens 10: I correctly thought the Titans would beat the three-point spread. Titans came back with 10 points in the fourth in a game with tight defense. Both QBs gave up two picks.

Carolina Panthersn 34, Kansas City Chiefs 0: I said the Panthers would cover the 9.5 point spread. They did so by getting points in every quarter.

Chicago Bears 34, Detroit Lions 7: I said the Bears would beat the 3.5 point spread. It was never close.

Atlanta Falcons 27, Green Bay Packers 24: I said to bet on the Packers but not on their spread. Whoops. And to answer my two question (Which Michael Turner shows up? and Is Aaron Rodgers healthy enough to play?): Rodgers was 25/37 for 313 yards and 3 TDs for the Packers; Turner had 121 yards on 26 carries with a TD for the Falcons.

Indianapolis Colts 31, Houston Texans 27: Colts gave up 20 unanswered points to go into the final quarter down 20-10. Peyton Manning and the Colts were probably lucky on their final TD with Reggie Wayne's one-handed catch -- I'm not sure he was in the end zone with control of the ball. Still, when you give up 21 final quarter points, as the Texans did, you deserve to lose. I predicted the Colts would beat the three-point spread, and they did but barely.

Miami Dolphins 17, San Diego Chargers 10: I thought the Chargers would win by at least a TD. Bolts QB Philip Rivers failed to complete fewer than half of his passes, RB LaDainian Tomlinson had an awful game (35 yards, no TDs), and the Fins played smart, disciplined football (one penalty all game for a total of five yards).

New York Giants 44, Seattle Seahawks 6: I was wrong to predict the Giants would win but have a tough time beating the 7.5 point spread. The Hawks were never in the game and were a horrible 1 for 11 on third downs. Giants scored at least one TD every quarter. WR Sinorice Moss had 2 TD catches, Brandon Jacobs had 2 TD runs. Everything was working for the Giants and seven players had gains of at least 19 yards.

Washington Redskins 23, Philadelphia Eagles 17: I thought the Eagles would win, but by less than the 5.5 point spread. Philly blew a 14-0 first quarter lead. Eagles had only 58 running yards. Skins RB Clinton Portis, on the other hand, had 145 yards on 29 carries with a touchdown.

Denver Broncos 16, Tampa Bay Buccaneers 13: I was exactly correct in saying the Broncs would win but without beating the field goal spread. A balanced attack with eight different Broncos player catching for 10 yards or more. The teams were evenly matched and the Broncs pulled it out.

Arizona Cardinals 41, Buffalo Bills 17: I said: "The Cards are favoured by one, but I'd take the Bills who have controlled possession in each of their first four games." I was very, very wrong. The Cards dominated the game, controlling possession for 36:16, forcing four turnovers and scoring at least one touchdown in every quarter. The Bills looked less than ordinary and there will be questions about whether they can win this division.

Dallas Cowboys 31, Cincinnati Bengals 22: Early on it looked like they were going to beat the 17 point spread nearly everyone was predicting, but it wasn't to be. Dallas dominated the first 23 minutes with 23 first-half running plays. But the Boys blew a 17-point lead and Cincy got close (17-16) by the middle of the third quarter. The Cowboys are too good, though, and they used four different players, including rookie RB Felix Jones, WR Terrell Owens and TE Jason Witten, to score.

New England Patriots 30, San Francisco 49ers 21: The game was never as close as the score might indicate and the Pats easily covered the three point spread.
The Pats defense was incredible, pressuring J.T. O'Sullivan, especially from his right forcing him to throw against his arm. The Pats looked like their 16-0 incarnation, owning the ball for 39:52.

Pittsburgh Steelers 26, Jacksonville Jaguars 21: As a Steelers fan, I am glad my prediction that "Jax wins but doesn't cover the four points" was wrong. Big Ben didn't practice this week because of his bum shoulder but threw his first 300-yard game since November 2006 (26/41, 309, 3 TDs). Both teams' defense were aggressive but the Steelers had a long drive in the second half of the fourth quarter to win. An exciting game that had the feel of a playoff contest -- and there could be a rematch in the AFC final in January.

Minnesota Vikings 30, New Orleans Saints 27: I thought the Saints were going to be the ones winning by three points. It was an exciting Monday night game that was back and forth with lots of action. The Saints had four turnovers including two interceptions, one of which was returned for a TD. The Saints had a field kick that was blocked -- and returned for a TD. The Saints dominated play in the first half but still went into half-time down 20-10. They roared back and led 27-20 until a late drive and a field goal allowed the visitors to eke out the victory. A blown call (missed face mask pull) and penalties (11 for 102 yards) fatally hurt the Saints but on the plus side, Reggie Bush returned a pair of punts for TDs, becoming the second player in NFL history to accomplish that feat in one game.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:09 AM

 
NCC endorses Harper

From an unsigned National Citizens Coalition blog post:

"What this country needs is a government that will keep spending under control, and do all it can to help small businesses. Except for the Conservative party, all our federal parties have proposed to significantly increase spending, increase taxes or increase both. One has to look no further than Bob Rae’s Ontario of the 1990s to see that increased spending and increased taxes resulted in an economic disaster.

So before you bombard me with e-mails accusing me of being bias towards the Conservative party - get over it!

The fact is the Conservatives are the only party talking about keeping federal spending under control. I do not have to wait and see the Conservative platform to know that it will contain only a fraction of the spending the other four parties have initiated."

So much for being non-partisan.

I have no idea why they don't wait for the Conservative platform to be released; at least then they could claim to have studied the implications of each party's position and considered them carefully and then endorse the Tories. Instead of being principle conservative observers, they have become complete shills. And I'm not sure what gives supposedly small-c conservatives confidence that the big-C Conservatives won't spend. Have they forgotten the 25% increase in federal spending in the first two Harper/Flaherty budgets?
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:20 PM

 
Things to think about

I don't think these two quotes over at Overcoming Bias are particular profound but they are still worth contemplating.

"But I am not an object. I am not a noun, I am an adjective. I am the way matter behaves when it is organized in a John K Clark-ish way. At the present time only one chunk of matter in the universe behaves that way; someday that could change."
-- John K Clark

"Waiting for the bus is a bad idea if you turn out to be the bus driver."
-- Michael M. Butler

And political types might want to ponder this: political moderates don't see as much difference between candidates as partisans do. Not really surprising, is it?
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:53 AM

 
The days are long but the years are short

That's the message of a beautiful, brief video from Gretchen Rubin, who blogs at The Happiness Project. I know I've linked to this video before, and I probably like it more than you will for personal reasons. (I treasure the subway ride to school with my son, Michael, each morning -- the significance of which will be clear once you watch the video.) Yes, it is sappy and women are more likely to enjoy it. But I still think the video is worth watching.
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:33 AM

 
Green report honest about declining standard of living

The green future looks a lot like the crappy past. The Guardian reported last week:

"People will have to be rationed to four modest portions of meat and one litre of milk a week if the world is to avoid run-away climate change, a major new report warns.

The report, by the Food Climate Research Network, based at the University of Surrey, also says total food consumption should be reduced, especially "low nutritional value" treats such as alcohol, sweets and chocolates.

It urges people to return to habits their mothers or grandmothers would have been familiar with: buying locally in-season products, cooking in bulk and in pots with lids or pressure cookers, avoiding waste and walking to the shops - alongside more modern tips such as using the microwave and internet shopping."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:30 AM

 
Because maintaining our whale blubber stock is a vital national interest

CTV headline: "Dion vows to protect Arctic culture, resources."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:28 AM

 
The quality of modern celebrity journalism

Or, better yet, the quality of modern celebrities. Newsweek interviews Julianne Moore -- a beautiful name and a beautiful woman. But c'mon?

Newsweek: "You have two kids. Do you think of yourself as a MILF?"

Moore: "Oh my God. I hope so. Because if you're not a MILF, that makes you—I don't know, what does that make you? I don't think anybody wants to be a MINLF."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:26 AM

 
Most common sense thing ever uttered about Canadian politics

Steve Jenke on the fact that prison inmates are voting for the Liberals, and against the Tories:

"I mean, how can the Liberals have any credibility on crime when the criminals want them to win?"
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:44 AM

 
Great line













About carbon offsets from tonight's King of the Hill: "All the sanctimony without any of the effort."
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:37 PM

 
Nonsense about private school parents who support public education

Kay Hagan is the Democratic senatorial candidate who is likely to defeat Republican Senator Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina. Most polls have Kagan ahead by 5-8 points.

Hagan's family is well off. McClatchy reports:

"The Hagans are well-off: Chip Hagan is worth between $10.7 million and $44 million, according to disclosure reports. They sent their children to private schools – a move critics say was inconsistent with her outspoken support for public education.

Hagan says she wanted to make sure her children had access to science, physical education and foreign languages."

There is nothing wrong with sending one's children to an independent school. (And there is nothing wrong with being wealthy.) More importantly, there is nothing incompatiable with sending one's children to an independent school and supporting public education. I guess the presumption is that people who send their kids to a private school think all parents should do the same. That's not true, but what else would those who make such a criticism think?
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:14 PM

 
Good news from Iraq: fewer funeral banners announcing deaths of loved one

McClatchy reports:

"This is the way almost all Iraqi families announce the deaths of relatives. When a loved one dies, hanging the banners is the first order of business.

If it was a violent death, as many here are, a banner is hung at the scene of the attack. Another is nailed up at the victim's house, another along the main road into his neighborhood and perhaps another at his mosque.

They are always made from black cloth, and the names of the dead are always painted in yellow. The other details — a list of relatives left behind and the place and dates of the funeral — are usually painted in white. Most banners are around four feet long and three feet wide.

It is a custom that existed here long before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, but over the last five and a half years, the banners have taken on new meaning. They are an informal measure of security, a way for residents to gauge whether their neighborhood is becoming more or less dangerous.

Between 2005 and 2007, at the height of violence, the banners blanketed Baghdad. They still hang on buildings and blast walls across the capital, but in far fewer numbers."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:01 PM

 
On political plagiarism

Gerry Nicholls at Macleans.ca:

"I would love it if Prime Minister Harper started plagiarizing the speeches of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thacher."
posted by Paul Tuns at 5:42 PM

 
Old Labour is New again

Or is that New Old Labour is Old New Labour again? Not sure, but either way, Peter Mandelson is in Gordon Brown's cabinet as Business Secretary. Mandelson calms the waters, although I'm not sure they are the political or economic seas.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:34 AM

 
Advice for Jack Layton

Shave the mustache. The Sunday Telegraph reports:

"Moustaches have had a mixed history. In Germany, Bismarck's walrus soup-strainer concealed successful statecraft, whereas Kaiser Wilhelm II's ferociously upturned moustache presaged defeat. Hitler wore a long, waxed moustache in the First World War but was ordered to trim it to fit his gas-mask and so replaced it with the minimalist Charlie Chaplin toothbrush that apparently lent him gravitas (go figure!). Stalin and Saddam Hussein further damaged the image of the moustache.

In the 1930s to 1950s the pencil moustache denoted the cad, despite the heroic examples of Ronald Colman and Clark Gable. The 1970s saw the Zapata moustache being sported by leftie students and academics: its drooping corners had the advantage of imparting a sullen expression. Moustaches enjoyed a final fling in the 1980s, but are now severely out of fashion. In a recent poll, a majority of American women said they would refuse to kiss a man with a moustache...

Last August a rumour spread that David Miliband was growing a moustache. This appeared to have no firmer roots than a particularly aggressive streak of five o'clock shadow across his upper lip. Such a move would probably be unwise. Public taste is fickle and, at least for the time being, seems to have turned against moustaches on public figures."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:29 AM

 
How to invest

Richard Thaler, professor of behavioral science and economics at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, among others, was asked by Business Week for investing advice during this time of economic turmoil. The question was more where to invest but Thaler answered more about how to invest:

"I have not looked at any of my holdings and don't intend to. I don't want to be tempted to jump because I think I'd be more likely to jump in the wrong direction than the right one. My advice has always been to choose a sensible diversified portfolio and stop reading the financial pages. I recommend the sports section."
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:25 AM

 
Any given Sunday










Tennessee Titans at Baltimore Ravens: The Titans aren't getting the respect they deserve, with critics pointing to wins against three losing teams to inflate their 4-0 record. This is a game between two of the three best defenses in the NFL. The Ravens flashed moments of brilliance against the Steelers in Monday Night's game, but I'll go with the Titans, who have one of the best running games (rookie RBs Chris Johnson & LenDale White) and a defense that will pressure rookie Ravens QB Joe Flacco into making mistakes; should beat the three-point spread by which they are favoured because of Baltimore's short week.

Kansas City Chiefs at Carolina Panthers: The Panthers are an up-and-coming team, the Chiefs are rebuilding. Cats QB Jake Delhomme has plenty of options: WRs Steve Smith and Muhsin Muhammad and RBs Larry Johnson, Jonathan Stewart and DeAngelo Wiliams. Their offensive line is getting better every game. Panthers are favoured by 9.5 and I think they'll do it.

Chicago Bears at Detroit Lions: Last season the Lions won both games with their division rivals but have been absolutely horrendous this season. The Bears have looked good at times, with both their losses coming off a field goal. But I don't like (or trust) Bears QB Kyle Orton despite his 13-5 record in 18 career starts. They'll give the ball to rookie RB Matt Forte a lot. Devin Hester is coming into his own as a WR. Lions QB Jon Kitma has his share of problems including 5 interceptions in three games. I'd bet the Bears beat the 3.5 spread.

Atlanta Falcons at Green Bay Packers: Two big question marks: Which Falcons RB Michael Turner show up? He has had two great games, two lousy ones. And: Is Aaron Rodgers healthy enough to play? How many times will it be noted that Brett Favre never missed a game. Gotta bet on the Packers but not on the 7.5 points by which they are favoured.

Indianapolis Colts at Houston Texans: Texans have disappointed all season. The Colts have been terrible against the running game and will need to shut down rookie Houston RB Steve Slaton. Indy had last weekend off, giving former two-time MVP Peyton Manning more time to get back in shape. Colts have a lot to prove and will rise to the challenge on the road and beat the three-point spread.

San Diego Chargers at Miami Dolphins: The Chargers are now on a roll. The big win against the Patriots two weeks ago notwithstanding, the Fins are still the Fins. RB Ronnie Brown is not going to get five TDs this time; the Bolts defense is getting better. So is their star RB LaDanian Tomlinson who is getting better as his toe injury heals. Chargers win and beat the 6.5 point spread.

Seattle Seahawks at New York Giants: The Giants have won seven in a row going back to the beginning of post-season play last year; the Seahawks are dealing with a plethora of injuries and using backup WRs or ones returning from injuries. Giants are without Plaxico Burress who is suspended after missing a team practise. The Giants have other offensive weapons including RB Brandon Jacobs and their defense is excellent. But beating the 7.5 point spread will be tough.

Washington Redskins at Philadelphia Eagles: Gotta love this game. Skins have impressed since their opening week defeat, while the Eagles look alternatively very strong and quite vulnerable. I think the Eagles are the better team but the status of RB Brian Westbrook might be decisive. The Eagles blitzing defense might be too much for Skins QB Jason Campbell, who has three consecutive games with a 100+ passer rating. Eagles should win but not by 5.5.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Denver Broncos: Bucs have a decent but spotty offense led by replacement QB Brian Griese, who has three picks in each of the past two games. They also have a solid defense (19.5 points per game). The Broncs have no defense but the second most potent offense. Jay Cutler is throwing to both Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal. They might go to RB Selvin Young to change up the game a little and prevent throws into the Bucs' Tampa 2 defense. The Bucs should stay on the ground to keep the Broncs offense off the field. The Broncos lost last week to the lowly Chiefs because of four turnovers; that shouldn't happen again. Broncos win but don't beat the three point spread.

Buffalo Bills at Arizona Cardinals: Gotta like the Bills even though they have played soft teams up til now. Kurt Warner is having a fantastic season but how will he do without WR Anquan Boldin? Warner has relied on the passing game because the running game isn't there, so they have to figure out how to get more out of RB Larry Fitzgerald. The Cards are favoured by one, but I'd take the Bills who have controlled possession in each of their first four games.

Cincinnati Bengals at Dallas Cowboys: Cincy is truly horrible and things get worse with QB Carson Palmer a giant question mark. Dallas, their home loss to the Skins last week notwithstanding, is still one of the best teams in the NFL. I think the Boys come back big this Sunday, put the run back in the game and beat the 17 point spread.

New England Patriots at San Francisco 49ers: We'll see how long (and bad) the Pats season will be. One loss to Miami does not a horrible season make. Following that defeat with a loss to the Niners, however, would mean New England has an uphill battle. RB Laurence Maroney is due for a big game, coach Bill Belichick had two weeks to prepare after last week's bye, and the Pats have more weapons overall on both sides of the ball. Pats win and cover the three points.

Pittsburgh Steelers at Jacksonville Jaguars: If the Steelers play like they did in the second half of last week's game, they can win. If they play like they did in the previous three havles, they don't stand a chance. Ttheir top two RBs are out, the offensive line is hurt and they are coming off a short week. The Jags are a physical team and will grind down the Steelers. Big Ben has looked merely human in the last few games. The game may come down to how Jax QB David Garrard handles Pittsburgh's blitzing defense: does he lose the running game and get sacked or does he respond by passing the ball to the under-covered receivers. Jax wins but doesn't cover the four points.

Minnesota Vikings at New Orleans Saints: Neither team has lived to the hype (especially mine) that preceded them before the season. Vikings have only two TD passes in four games, so QB Gus Frerotte has to step it up, especially because Adrian Peterson has run for less than 100 yards in his last two games. The Saints run defense is ranked 20th overall. The Vikings can't win, but the Saints could lose; the question for me is whether the Saints allow more points than the Drew Brees-led offense score. I don't think it will. Saints cover the three-point spread.

Byes:

Cleveland Browns: Should, but won't, use off week to reconsider the Derek Anderson experiment.

New York Jets: After last week, they probably wish they could go on.

St. Louis Rams: Not playing is an act of mercy.

Oakland Raiders: Ditto the Rams.
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:08 PM

 
How to succeed in politics

Writing in Report magazine, Gerry Nicholls has the list of 10 things one must do to be a successful politician. Gerry subscribes to the cynical view of politics; that is, the correct view of politics.

There are two takeaway points: truth and substance don't get you very far and sell out your principles. Gerry might say that some, er, conservatives have done that (lie, manipulate, sell out their principles). I for one observe that this is exactly what they have done but make no judgement about them doing so. Politicians have one job: get elected. Well, two jobs. Get re-elected.
posted by Paul Tuns at 3:08 PM

 
Huh?

Environmental activist James Hoggan complains in the Vancouver Sun that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is not a 'leader':

"After years in which North America was the leading international holdout against action on climate change, the continental tide appears to have turned -- mostly. Only one leader still stands against the international consensus, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper."

Isn't Harper the only true leader if he stands against the conventional wisdom, takes a different stand, and refuses to go with the rest of the herd. Isn't that leadership? Whether he's right or wrong about the policy, taking a different stand is leadership. But Hoggan thinks that as long as your are following on a pet issue, you are leading:

"Canadians will call on any government they send to Ottawa to provide strong leadership on this issue, and if it's Harper, he'll need to start following the example of other world leaders."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:45 AM

 
Great satire

The Onion: "Breast Cancer Launches WNBA Awareness Month."
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:37 AM

 
Told ya so

The environment just isn't an issue you can campaign on. Roger Gibbins, president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation, laments in the Montreal Gazette:

"This was going to be the green election, a transformative contest with political parties campaigning on competing climate change policies.

Canadians, we were told, were ready for a 'green shift,' perhaps not along the lines articulated by Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, but definitely in the direction of more decisive action on climate change. Having talked the talk on climate change, Canadians were ready to walk.

We were also told voters were primed and pumped for a substantive debate on the relative merits of the regulatory approach of the Conservatives, the carbon-tax plans of the Liberals and Greens and the cap-and-trade approach favoured by the NDP.

Sure, initiatives like the Liberals' Green Shift were complicated but voters were ready to dig into a difficult policy debate.

To date, however, there is no evidence a green wave is sweeping voters and parties before it."

Not ready to give up on green politics yet, Gibbins says that the future will be seen in the context of the next B.C. election where climate change versus pocket book issues will be contested. Until then, he says, "it appears Canadians are not prepared to address global warming when the economy cools." Anyone with any political sense -- that is those who don't have environmental blinders on -- were saying as much for as long as I can remember. Here's another prediction: the Green Party doesn't break 10% in any province other than British Columbia.
posted by Paul Tuns at 9:19 AM

 
The truth about McCain

The Daily Telegraph editorializes:

"But the brave message of this maverick senator from Arizona, whether on free trade, pork-barrel spending, the surge in Iraq, global warming or the granting of citizenship to immigrants, seems to have taken second place during the campaign to ad hominem attacks on Mr Obama.

In the weeks ahead, Mr McCain needs to reach out to independent voters with a coherent presentation of his policies. Of his courage and experience there is no doubt. But in the final stage of the race for the greatest political office on earth, he has so far proved a disappointment."

It sounds like a harsh judgement, but its true. Voters want to hear what John McCain is about. The attacks on Barack Obama have been made and those open to this line of argument will have decided which candidate to support. Now the candidates must win over those voters who (say they) decide who to vote for based on the issues. McCain hasn't won them over yet, but needs to. I'm not saying these voters they will support the Republicans because of McCain's views on the issues; I'm am saying that by having McCain talk about issues, they will support the Republicans by saying to themselves they agree with McCain on this or that even though it is often other factors (respect for the resume, a gut instinct, dislike of the other guy, identity politics, etc....).
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:18 AM

 
Diversity San Francisco-style

The New York Times reports that there is a diversity of views in 'liberal' San Francisco. Love this paragraph:

"A walk through the streets here, talking with people as they go about their daily routine, reveals an anxiety about the state of the economy that has gripped most of the nation. One axiom emerging from the first day of this exercise: Worrying about one’s bank account — and trashing elected officials — in tumultuous times has no partisan claim."

But the ideological lines are blurred. Like it is news, the Times reports (no doubt mouth agape with incredulity):

"Campaign consultants often reduce the country’s electoral map to Big Mac eaters versus arugula lovers, “Two and a Half Men” viewers versus “30 Rock” watchers, hockey fans versus the sort of people who visit enotecas, but those conventions generally fail to hold up after conversations with voters, even those who identify strongly with one political party."

How does this manifest itself in San Fran?:

"Ideological lines are not always finely drawn along the road to social policy, either. There is the banker who embraces same-sex marriage but sides with Republicans when it comes to the subject of a federal bailout of banks. Or the restaurant owner who would gladly pay more taxes to put up green municipal buildings, but has complex reactions to universal health care for employees he can barely afford to pay. Or Joel Muchmore, a lawyer, who embraces this city’s liberal social policies, but does not want them extended to national security."

Still, as the Times reports, there is no doubt that Barack Obama will win by a wide margin here. So political diversity manifests itself in liberals wringing their hands and still pulling lever or marking their ballot for the most liberal of Democrats.
posted by Paul Tuns at 7:05 AM

 
Number one question for Stephen Harper

It's a long story but we now know that Stephen Harper enjoys snacking on junk food. So the number one question for Harper, and the other leaders tonight, should be: "What is your favourite chocolate bar?" Don't laugh; it is the natural extension of identity politics: does a candidate share my taste in food? There's a great Onion TV episode related to this, here.
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:57 AM

 
Will on the economic turmoil and politics

George F. Will said in his Washington Post column yesterday, that politicians and the press can't blame the public, even if regular folks are, at least partially, at fault:

"We are waist deep in evasions because one cannot talk sense about the cultural roots of the financial crisis without transgressing this cardinal principle of politics: Never shall be heard a discouraging word about the public.

Concerning which, a timeless political trope is: Government should budget the way households supposedly do, conforming outlays to income. But the crisis came partly because so many households decided that it would be jolly fun to budget the way government does, hitching outlays to appetites.

Beneath Americans' perfunctory disapproval of government deficits lurks an inconvenient truth: They enjoy deficits, by which they are charged less than a dollar for a dollar's worth of government. Conservatives participate in this, even though deficits fuel government's growth by obscuring its cost.

The people can emulate the government because credit has been democratized. Democratization of everything is supposedly an unquestionable good, but a blizzard of credit cards (1.5 billion of them, nine per cardholder), subsidized loans and cheap money has separated the pleasure of purchasing from the pain of paying. Furthermore, the entitlement mentality fostered by the welfare state includes a felt entitlement to a standard of living untethered from savings."
posted by Paul Tuns at 6:51 AM

 
Welcome to Canada. Check your sense of humour at the door.

A CHUM-FM host in Toronto apologized for saying that the TV series CSI: Crime Scene Investigation couldn't be set in Newfoundland "because they all have the same DNA." Funny, but Darren Lamb's comments led to some kill-joy sending a complaint to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, which instead of replying (as it should have) with a polite "grow up, bitch" passed the complaint to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. CHUM-FM apologized to Miranda Callahan for Lamb's remarks. Sadly, the broadcaster is gutless:

"CHUM program director David Corey - who only last week told CBC Radio St. John's Morning Show that the joke was made solely for a laugh, and that he personally thought it was funny - has since written to Callahan with an apology.

In his letter to Callahan, Corey described the joke as 'insulting and offensive.'

'I have made my thoughts on this matter clear to our entire morning team and they also agree that such remarks have no place on CHUM-FM,' Corey wrote.

'The comment in no way reflects how any of us feel about Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders. I hope you will accept my sincere apology, and I give you my word that comments such as these have no place on our airwaves,' he wrote.

The station also aired an apology for the joke on its morning program on Wednesday.

'You know sometimes how you don't think before speaking,' cohost Lamb told the audience listening at about 6:10 a.m."

I'm surprised that the complaint was sent to the CRTC rather than a human rights commission. It's not like a comedian hasn't been hauled in front of these kangaroo courts before for making allegedly derogatory jokes.

CHUM might want to consider a spine or testicle transplant. I'll never listen to them again.

And the message is clear to everyone in broadcasting: don't be funny if you might offend someone.
posted by Paul Tuns at 10:20 PM

 
Tyranny of Nice































Tyranny of Nice: How Canada Crushes Freedom in the Name of Human Rights (and why it matters to Americans) by Kathy Shaidle and Pete Vere with an introduction by Mark Steyn.

You can buy an e-book on lulu and get it immediately. You can buy a dead tree version directly from Interim Publishing by ordering here.

Kathy Shaidle's interview on The World Tonight (last night) in Calgary can be heard here.
posted by Paul Tuns at 8:50 PM

 
Congress to people: go away (for now)

From The Hill:

"The House is limiting e-mails from the public to prevent its websites from crashing due to the enormous amount of mail being submitted on the financial bailout bill.

As a result, some constituents may get a 'try back at a later time' response if they use the House website to e-mail their lawmakers about the bill defeated in the House on Monday in a 205-228 vote."
posted by Paul Tuns at 11:43 AM

 
Strangest political photo ever


posted by Paul Tuns at 1:12 AM

 
Typical liberal hypocrisy

The Washington Times reports:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she voted to ban last year.

Financial Leasing Services Inc. (FLS), owned by Paul F. Pelosi, has received $99,000 in rent, utilities and accounting fees from the speaker's "PAC to the Future" over the PAC's nine-year history.

The payments have quadrupled since Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer of his wife's committee in 2007, Federal Election Commission records show. FLS is on track to take in $48,000 in payments this year alone - eight times as much as it received annually from 2000 to 2005, when the committee was run by another treasurer."
posted by Paul Tuns at 1:07 AM

 
Quick baseball predictions

I don't have the time to do a thorough analysis, so here are my picks. I generally like teams with superior 1-2 pitchers and strong closer. The pick I'm least confident with is the Cubs-Dodgers -- I kinda like the Dodgers going to the World Series on the strength of Manny Ramirez.

American League Divisional Playoffs

Boston Red Sox defeat the LA Angels in four
Chicago White Sox beat the Tampa Bay Rays in five

National League Division Playoffs

Milwaukee Brewers beat the Philadelphia Phillies in four
Chicago Cubs defeat the LA Dodgers in five

American League Championship

Red Sox beat the White Sox in five

National League Championship

Brewers beat the Cubs in seven

World Series

Red Sox beat the Brewers in five
posted by Paul Tuns at 12:32 AM