Michael Ignatief, Saviour -&- Female AIDS Immigrants, A Reality Check -&- PM: appointing justices -- the tribe has spoken

Bumped up; new posts are below.

Do you want to read the plans of the movers and shakers in the centre and for Liberal heaven shortly? First Michael Ignatief is parachuted into a safe Liberal riding over the wishes of Liberals who had worked there and planned to run.

Today this relatively recent implant--injection of new blood, perhaps--and import from a teaching position at Harvard is favoured with not one, but two articles -- one, a major article about him in the National Post. It affirms that those who run important businesses, Liberal power, Bay Street boys, have plans. Out of all the Canadians running for public office--that is out of 360 plus candidates--Michael Ignatief gets, not just one article about the IMPORTANT PEOPLE'S plans for him to replace Paul Martin as soon as Martin can be politically buried, but also, Ignatief gets his own space to pontificate about how wonderful PM's social values have been for Canada.

I am seeing a purplish red. TWO ARTICLES IN ONE NEWSPAPER IN ONE DAY to give prominence to one parachuted import who is expected to save the Liberal bacon and pork barrel.

In the comments and editorial section, we may read the great intellect's pontification on the Conservative leader and how he has not been really checked out adequately on his social views. Well, give me Stephen Harper, a father of two children, who wants to go home to his family on the weekend (ex-MP Deb Gray), a man who has lived in Canada, thought through and worked out policy, rather than a parachute candidate who has come, deigning to enlighten us. More about this later.


Two articles: one about, one by Michael Ignatief, the latest Liberals' saviour

Ignatieff's 'vision' looks beyond vote -- Bay Street eyes candidate as Martin's successor [for...after the burial ... the new charismatic saviour of Liberal socialism] John Ivison, National Post, January 14, 2006

Mr. Ignatieff suggested a new one-stop shop for immigrants -- a Canadian Citizenship Centre -- where new immigrants could get information about family unification, jobs, training [. . . . ]

While his Conservative challenger, John Capobianco, positions himself as "a hard-working neighbour to be your voice in Ottawa," Mr. Ignatieff can barely contain his enthusiasm for his "vision" -- a phrase he uses repeatedly. [. . . . ]

Spare me another Liberal "vision" and probably new Liberal patronage jobs to add to all the others.

Ordinary hard working Canadians have had enough of being talked down to from atop the intellectual pinnacle. We don't need imported star candidates pontificating to us so they can get to the Ottawa trough. Why would Mr. Ignatief leave a position at Harvard to come to Canada to save us? To save the Liberal Party?

Many Canadians want the opportunity to decide, based on our own reasoning, just what Canada needs. Some Canadians would like to be represented by ordinary individuals, ones who have had to be careful with their finances, who know what it is like to husband their resources by making choices, people who know what ordinary life--life without charisma and high profile position--is like. We want these elected representatives to go to Ottawa and and to keep Ottawa out of Canadians' pockets. Less federal input in our lives would be a welcome change. What would happen if Canadians had choices not imposed from the Ottawa trough? They might find that choice would open doors closed by government control.

Liberal Compassion on someone else's dime

Yesterday, I read of the number of female immigrants who come to Canada and then, CANADA DISCOVERS THEY HAVE AIDS.

About 20% of the women diagnosed in 2004 were immigrants from HIV endemic countries, primarily from Africa and the Caribbean.

A firm NO to a wayward partner might be apropos, even in Africa. Act there, instead of coming here to use our resources. Liberal Canada is importing new drains on the medical system. Why should other Canadians pay for this?

"I don't know how I got infected with HIV", says Lynne, a 26 year old Toronto mother of five. "I think it was from my ex-boyfriend because he was always out messing around with other people that would sleep with him." ("Women with HIV educate others about protection", The Daily Gleaner, Jan. 13, 06, B2.)

I haven't met you but I know how you got it, you blithering idiot! I'll bet you're on welfare too and your kids have seen no other example than the father(s) no longer there and the wayward ex-boyfriend. They will behave similarly and expect society to support them. And fine Liberal vote buyers will talk about Canadians' superior compassion as long as other people, taxpayers, are paying for this.

She has shown great concern for protecting the interests of her children has she not? Where is their father(s) and what effect does a guy like the wayward one have on her children, anyway? Didn't she know she could get AIDS? Did these women ever consider monogamy and testing of that partner before ... ? No-one talks about personal responsibility, I note. Nor do politicians. Why should society pay for more of the same? It only reinforces lack of personal responsibility, allows it to continue, and supports more of the same in the next generation.

With the problems of whether Canada's medical system is adequate for those who have actually worked here to pay for it, why are immigrants to Canada not tested before they come? Why should Canadians be paying for new immigrants and refugees' medical treatment before they have even contributed to Canada? I would not bring a sick individual into my home to drain meagre resources from my own family, so why would I bring the same into my country? Prudence for the sake of the Canadian family is not a Liberal value either, it seems. Michael Ignatief did not mention these AIDS patients in his fine words about servicing immigrants, (below) I note. (I may choose to contribute to a charity for Canadians who have had bad fortune but I refuse, where possible, to contribute to more of the same in the Third World, and certainly not to importing problems. My personal reality check.)

Oh, there is more to be said about Liberal social values and telling us about the fine Liberal system of social values--vote buying--on other peoples' tax dollars.



This election isn't over Michael Ignatieff, Jan. 14, 06

Liberal policies make sense to the people of my riding. They know that the Martin government hasn't just talked about social justice. It has backed rhetoric with action. It has defended a key institution of common citizenship, our national health care system, with $43-billion of investment to bring down waiting times and improve service to people. .... a national program of daycare and early childhood learning .... [. . . . ]

Canadians are entitled to know whether [Harper] would govern from the right or from the centre, whether he respects the bedrock commitment of all Canadians to a compassionate country based on equality of citizenship

I hadn't noticed that citizens weren't equal ... except where Liberals themselves have gerrymandered the system to give advantage to one of their voting blocks. What is Ignatief talking about?

Liberals have not asked me whether they are positioned at the center (no!) and whether I want their kind of compassion based on other people's money and the equality that sees the hard working taxpayers' money thrown at problems the Liberals have imported or that props up people so they do not have to change (or money for travel abroad for fine talking fests about how to help). Absolutely not! That is not equality; that has been and is Liberal vote buying through importing voters who cost the rest too much in too many cases.

Mr. Ignatief, what Liberals do/plan/promise/talk and talk about is not necessarily the centre. My greatest fear is that the chattering classes will push the Conservatives too close to the bilgewater we've been fed by Liberals. I want change, not fine tuning and more of the same.


G & M Poll: Some of the Canadian Tribe have spoken on appointed justices

Liberals have appointed most of our Supremes and they come with philosophical baggage and Liberal approval ... and we don't want it any more. We want freedom and we want to choose. We have had enough of Liberals' choosing for us to last a lifetime.

---