Swingers Clubs Don't Harm Society

Lords of the Land?
This article worries me plenty of how the liberal courts have altered not only the judicial system but how society and morality is conducted in Canada. "The high court, which was ruling on two Quebec cases, said Canadian standards can tolerate the activities, even when they are done amid spectators." Who is to say what the standards are in Canada? Are nine people suppose to really decide the direction of Canada's morality? The liberals have created this to make an elitist society where nine people have the power to turn Canadian history anyway they want. The Chief Justice of Canada has precedence over the Speaker of the House of Commons. Also notice how the majority of the justices have been appointed by liberals. These are people that have more power than parliament themselves, not elected but mearly selected by the Prime Minister. This is totalitarianism as we know it currently happening in Canada. An elitist people that are not accountable to anyone and do not risk being stuck off their high horse no matter how outrageous the verdict. Why not let a farmer or mechanic on the bench? Trades count for about two million of Canada'a jobs. Would not this more proportionate to the Canadian population instead of elitists using political patronage to get their job? They are the lords of the land and nothing can do anything about it. As for this specific ruling, I think that it is just one more step to legalize protitution. It is not as though it has not been proposed. If you never knew about that, it was just the liberal media's way of keeping the lid in things to not look like total kooks. This ruling, like same sex marriage, in my opinion, does not reflect the views of Canadians and has been handed down to us by liberal elitists to accept and not refute. At least leave these issues to parliament, where elected officials can have a free vote on the issue and let them and their ridings decide the fate of Canada's future.

Security to be Licensed

Badges, We Don't Need No Stinkin' Badges!
It seems like the liberals are up to their shenanigans again. This time, they are after people who are out to enforce the law. They may have special training but liberal governments who breed crime do not like this idea of course and try to make law enforcement harder then it has to be. I thought we were suppose to put a stop to crime and not encourage it. Then the Toronto (Red) Star plays the tiny violin in the background while it states that it needs the laws after giving a few examples of how people died during commiting offences. One of the stories is of "the 31-year-old man, who had been caught shoplifting 25 cans of baby formula, died after he was held face down by two grocery store employees and handcuffed by a security guard". Are they serious? Do we really want to give extra rights to people who break the law? I was under the impression that it was the opposite was true but I guess not. I do not really care if the man is Jean Valjean stealing a loaf of bread. An indictable offence is no different from the other and must be treated the same. If the man was not detained by a peace officer then the detainment is considered a citizen's arrest, which is perfectly legal in Canada under the following conditions. Are the liberals trying to take away this right that us as Canadians have? Are the police the only people who will have the power to enforce the law? No longer will Canadian citizens have the right to assist oficers unless they are trained. I can see it now, no one having a say except for the criminal rights we must protect in case they die while they commit offences. In closing, this is wrong in two counts, it violates the rights of Canadians and it enforces the rights of criminals which in my terms are both wrong and dictated both by liberal governments. I hope that I will not need a stinkin' badge when I see someone committing an offence and get arrested in return for violating the rights of criminals. Trying to be a good citizen is so hard to do these days especially in these hard liberal times!

Canada Targets Trans Fats

Lock your Doors, It's the Fat Police!
What are they thinking of now? Forcing us to not eat what we want! The article calls this "good news"? This is what I would expect from the Toronto (Red) Star. Are liberals honestly this lazy that they have to control the food that we eat. What is next? Armed units targeting what we eat, using sniper units to open fire on a man with a doughnut in his hand? Shake-downs at the local coffee shop? The "Fat Police" on patrol to serve and protect the broke tax-payer! This may seem like an exaggeration but it is already beginning. According to this article, Denmark has banned trans fats completly, but does not mention this untill the end of the article. The loyal government already control the television we watch as well as the radio we listen to. Is the food we eat next? Observe this quote from the article. "The impact of naturally occurring trans fats on health has not been well documented. Interestingly though, data from the few studies that have been conducted suggest that, unlike industrial trans fats, natural trans fats may not be associated with health problems." Would you think at least to do a few more studies on a product before you call in the "Fat Police" to take away everyone's doughnut? Liberals could not care less then to spend your money and not care who it affects. Freedom of conscience is a fundamental freedoms of the Canadian Constitution and is being violated in this case. As much as I hate Trudeau's little addition on the constitution, it comes in handy sometimes. What right do the liberals have in telling us that we can not be fat and eat doughnuts? I never though it would be this bad, especially in Canada. So remember the next time you bite into that doughnut that the Fat Police might be around the corner ready to take you down for something that should never be the government's business.

Calgary 'sexual sadist' gets 20 years for assaults

Is Justice Blind or Liberal?
It seems like that justice has actually prevailed in this case but thanks to our liberal politicians, the victory has been less than jubilant in reality to the Canadian citizens. I am glad that "justice" was at work in this case but what will happen to this offender of the law? Twenty years seems like a long time right? Not quite! This man has been sentenced twenty years in prison. Take a look at this publication from Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (must need Adobe Reader to view). Where do I start with this! This begins with a header of "Increasing sentence length does not reduce the likelihood of re-offending". Are you serious? If you kept the offenders in jail, they would not have the chance of re-offending. It is just that simple! If you also look carefully more, you will see that offenders who have been on their best behaviour can be eligible for parole in seven years or one third of their sentence, whichever is less. In this case, it is less then seven years that this man will be eligible for parole. Are there any girls he can rape in jail? "You have not raped anyone in jail so you must be OK!" I can not imagine the conversation that takes place. "And with the number of repeat sexual offenders being fairly high, I can see why it would be a good idea for your release". The liberal media has fooled you once again! They have just made a sentence that is less then seven years look like twenty. How those liberals sleep at night, I will never know! It is time to keep these especially dangerous offenders behind bars even when we know that they are at high risk of offending again. I guess the innocent Canadian public is at no match for some cheap and rehabilitating liberal votes. I thought justice was blind but I guess it is really liberal.

Martin vows to fight gun violence

Punishing Criminals or Owners?
Now Paul must have really been thinking when he dreamed this one up. How can I get the urban vote, not solve anything and look good to city dwellers all at the same time. Now you have really done it. To think of a hair-brained scheme like this must have took all five brain cells in his tiny head. As you know, it's time for the right to clear this one out. OK, how many people actually died in firearm related deaths? It must be a lot to make it a national issue. It is typical of Toronto to make themselves feel like the fate of Canada is in their hands but in reality the rest of Canada could not care less. The average firearm death rate in Canada per year is 1385 and 79% of these deaths were due to suicide. Only 14% of those were due to homicide. That only adds up to an average of 194 deaths a year in the country due to firearms. To put this into perpcective, 29 people in Canada died in 2002 due to avalances and almost 100 Canadians die annually in a fall involving a bed, while some 250 others perish after tumbling from or on steps. This is just another way of how liberal governments use their spin doctors to make the public worry about a situation that is not as serious as it seems and scares them enough to get re-elected. What is next? Mandatory straps on beds so that no one will fall out of them? It kills more people annually then firearm related homicides! This will be the next "national crisis", I can't even sleep to think that next morning I might not wake up! This is only as big as it is because Toronto stomps its feet the loudest to tick off the whole nation and drive away real attention from other issues. In all seriousness, why not punish the offenders who commit the crimes and not responsible firearms owners. If these handguns are allegedly being smugglerd to Canada, what good would a national registry do? They have already spent approximately $85 million on a system that is not working according to the honest and taxpaying Canadian public. Are you really suprised? Why not use that $85 million to have manditory sentences for offenders of these crimes? I guess that would make too much sense. They only want to punish the owners instead of the criminals. What a country we live in!

CBC Voter Toolkit 2006

The government doing something right?
I have stumbled across this and found it to be quite usefull for all of your election needs. I usually spend my blogs breaking down liberal media giants but I could not help commenting on this. This has several tools to help you choose you candidate faithfull such as the policies of the parties and the ability to comment on your local riding with other in the same constituency. You can also look at party blogs such as my favourite, the Blogging Tories, and get up to date on current events. There are other features of this site such as testing your knowledge of Canadian politics and gives a tutorial on how government works in Canada and compares it to the English and American forms. For people interested in learning about Canadian politics and getting into it for the first time or just want more information about the candidate in your riding, this is the website for you. This is a great resource and an informative site and it would be shame for it to be wasted. If you only go one one government controlled, liberal funded and bias website this year, make it this one!

Tory tax cut promise dominates Campaign

Perfect solution gone wrong?
I can not avoid talking about the election no matter how hard I try but this article in particular needs a little time for the right and a shake down from the truth police. No matter where I go, I always get asked about taxation in Canada. Frankly, it is always too high. There is the belief in Canada that the social safety net must be so large in this country that everyone is safe from doing even the most foolish of things such as not work or collect welfare for the sake of sloth. Who are the poor that the media talk about? Where are they and who are there names? Is poverty really a pandemic in this country as they say it is? Paul Martin increased CPP by 40% to assist the less fortunate. They must be abundant to make such a drastic move. Time for the right! This is not true and is a complete farce. The truth is that the media plays with the word "rich" to make you think terribly about a tax cut. When the media says "tax cuts only benefit the rich", they perceive a man with a top hat and a monocle smoking a cigar. This is not who the rich are! The truth is that if get a paycheque that isn't from welfare, you are considered to be very rich. So what about the poor? Isn't this a plague of national proportions? Again, not so. Persons with low income before taxes only consist of 15.9% and are 11.5% after taxes in 2003. The media makes this seem like taxes benefit the poor because there is a lower percentage of them after tax season. But the truth is that the lower income group does not pay any tax or gets it back after rebate. If they had a job, they would make money and pay taxes on that, either EI or income. Therefore if you have a paycheque, you are considered rich. This leaves the great majority of Canadians paying taxes that they could be placed back into the economy by consumers, thus creating jobs for the 15.9% instead of welfare cheques by the Crown. Liberal governments consider tax to be the perfect solution for the poor but has only created a schism between those who work as being rich and those who do not. Perfect solutions go wrong even with the best of intentions.

Retrial of 3 teens accused of hacking 12-year-old

Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil!
This tril has been at most very strange to me but shows a good example of how the judiciary strongly needs reform in our country. If these kids were found guilty in any other country, they would be six feet under or rotting in a 6'x6' cell. I am not trying to state that they are guilty, we must remember that all are innocent unless proven guilty but how long does it take to establish guilt in this country? "There was a previous proceeding that ended in a mistrial", quoting Ontario Superior Court Justice David McCombs. Why can't there be one trial to establish all of these facts. If he is found to be innocent, get off their backs. If they are found guilty, make sure that they will never see the light of day for as long as they live. I am aware that new evidence has emerged but isn't there enough to charge them of a crime being committed. These liberal judges are being too lenient toward the youth and should be able to pin then to a crime if the evidence is showing the guilt of the accused parties. If there is blood on the hands of the accused, is this not enough to accuse them? If these allegations against them are true, they are truly heinous persons and should never be allowed to interact with society again. The victim of this case was stabbed 70 times according to the article. Once by my count is too much and should not be tolerated. Now I should state why this case is so strange to me. The charged parties showed no emotion during the trial proceedings and always kept a straight face. I had a hard time myself to even read the article let alone sit in a courtroom to hear it. Perhaps they believe that if the speak no evil, others will believe that they don not hear or see it themselves. What scares me most is that if the accused party actually didn't commit the crime, then they are acting with the most insincerity and unproper manner in this situation that in my opinion is unhuman in every regard. If they honestly don't feel anything about this case and are not guilty of it, then how would the guilty party, assuming they are not, feel about commiting the act? It escapes me how you could not be affected by the information of this case. Is there any compassion left in society or are we to assume that this is run of the mill activity in our daily lives? Liberals are making society this way by being lenient to crime and should be stopped. It is time to establish society to where it should be and not where it is now. If this is how normal people feel about crime, then I must be out of touch with the society that liberal governments have created themselves. I will leave you with a quote by Ontario Superior Court Justice David McCombs, possibly on to something here and hopefully can find justice to restore society.

"There's no dispute, the facts of this case are horrific. Any right-thinking person would be affected by these facts."