The New Grassroots

Great article by our pal, Antonia Zebisias, on the new grassroots.

In the olden days, about, oh, three years ago, citizens who engaged in political campaigns had to get off their sofas and into church basements and candidates meetings.

They knocked on doors, dropped off flyers, planted signs.

They put the act in activism, the haul ass in grassroots.

Today, during Canada’s 41st federal election, or #elxn41 as it’s called on Twitter, voters don’t need to shiver in the cold shilling for their candidate. They can commiserate with friends on Facebook, fight the power via Twitter and put their politics on YouTube.

Well-researched as usual, it's great roundup and overview of what people are doing and what the pundits are saying about it.

Among others, AZ mentioned the group close to my heart -- as regular readers will know.

Another CAPP spin-off is Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper (CRUSH), which the Conservatives have described as “a radical anti-Stephen Harper group.” More than 6,500 strong, the registered non-profit has invested thousands of dollars on newspaper ads.

“I have received small amounts of cash in envelopes from very ordinary folks from all corners of the country, usually accompanied with a nice note complementing us on defending our democracy,” says founder Bill Nobels, a retired Ryerson University film and video professor.

Since the election was called the radical gang has come up with another tactic, Adopt-A-Riding.

Individual members identify a riding with a vulnerable Con in it, do some media research, then try to raise dough to buy ads in local papers.

The first one was Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. Mission accomplished. Ads will appear Monday.

Next was Vaughan and Thornhill, one ad buy, two targetted Cabinet Ministers. A two-fer!

Done. Money raised.

Next up, West Nova.

Brad Bossack, sponsor of this one did the research:

Three newspapers cover the whole riding, the Middleton Spectator, the Digby Courier, and the Yarmouth Vanguard. I've decided that 1/4 page ad in all three would be a fairly easy achievable goal for the cost of 618.91.

That one's in the bag too.

Now, CRUSHers have their eye on: Haldimand-Norfolk currently held by the lovely and talented Minister of Something or Other, Diane Finley, a noted social commentator best known for observations like these:

On employment insurance: “We do not want to make it lucrative for them to stay home and get paid for it.”

On child care: “The Liberals wanted to ensure that parents are forced to have other people raise their children. We do not believe in that.”

She's married to the lovely and talented Senator Doug Finley, he of In/Out fame.

This is just grand. Ordinary, pissed-off Canadians rising up (couldn't resist) to defend democracy. Our democracy. Not Stevie Peevie's. Ours.

Got a few bucks to spare? Want to defend democracy from the odious Finleys? Donate.

Democracy's Future*

If nothing else, the past five years have shown Canadians how badly broken our democracy is. Until and unless we get some radical electoral and democratic change, it's going to be up to citizens to protect what's left of that creaky old institution.

Luckily, we're a resourceful lot. When Harper prorogued Parliament for the second time, we'd had enough. Unfortunately, over 200,000 of us on Facebook and thousands in the streets didn't seem to impress the politicians much.

But that was just the beginning. More non-partisan or multi-partisan grassroots groups sprang up: Catch 22 Harper Conservatives, Unseat Harper, and a more recent group, LeadNow.

Today I went looking for more, specifically for groups aiming at young voters. Found two.

Apathy Is Boring.

Revolutionizing democracy through art & technology.

Apathy is Boring is a national non-partisan project. Our mission is to use art & technology to educate youth about democracy.

Apathy is Boring aims to meet the following Youth in Democracy Goals:

Increase youth voting rates.
Increase youth engagement in their communities.
Build a sustainable dialogue between youth and elected officials.

It has a dandy facts page with definitions and other helpful info.

OurVote is also targetting youth.

OurVote.ca's goal is to mobilize young Canadians to actively engage and participate in the now declared 2011 Elections for the governance of Canada!

Young Canadians have a decisive voice and interest in determining the direction of Canada and necessary leadership that takes into account our needs & concerns!

Why does does getting youth involved matter?

Because voter turn-out is declining and there's that old saw: 'Low voter turn-out favours the conservative parties'.

Hey, look at this (from October last year).

How Parliament would look if only youth voted .

Canada’s youth would elect a Liberal minority government, with a substantial increase in representation for the New Democrats, Bloc Québécois, and Greens, according to projections based on recent polls of Canadians between the ages of 18 and 24. The Conservative Party would be severely reduced, virtually wiped out east of Manitoba.

Want to unseat Stephen Harper? Encourage the kids to vote.

(*Cross-posted at Voices for Democracy, Unseat Harper's blog. Good bloggers there. Check it out.)

To my virtual roomie. . .

It's not you.

It's the election.

I've been invited to contribute to the blog at Unseat Harper.

After struggling with the mysteries of WordPress* (or as JJ calls it, 'WeirdPress') I produced this, Democracy's Future.

I will probably put a version of it up here tomorrow.

*@dBO: Man, the struggling brought back unhappy memories of 'WTF? I knew how to do this yesterday. Why is it all changed? Why does this have to be so fucking complicated?' Etc. You remember. Fun times.

Radical Anti-Harper Group Strikes Again

CRUSH, that radical anti-Harper group, has done it again! Just in time for the billion-dollar boondoggle, we've raised enough dough to put an ad in Saturday's Globe and Mail.

Here's Pam Allard, one of the admins making the announcement:

Because of the generous support and commitment of our members, we are pleased to announce that our latest ad will appear in the Focus section of the Globe & Mail on Saturday, June 26th to coincide with the G8/G20 summits. This ad will stress the economic mismanagement of the Harper government surrounding these summits.

We should all take great pride in this achievement!

It's the ninth ad in what we hope will be a snowballing crusade.

Catch up with the achievements of the totally grasssroots, multi-partisan, all-volunteer gang here. Donate if you can. And check out the de rigeur protest gear.

Beggar Me

Or, make me spend $100.

In my circles I'm known as a tightwad*.

But, over at the CRUSH (Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper) Facebook page, it was just announced that a donation challenge issued by Lexy Cameron had been met. She had offered to match $100 in donations from NEW donors and now she's going to have to pony up.

I thought that was a good idea, so I just renewed it. Donate here and when the total gets to $100, I'll match it.

You remember CRUSH, that radical anti-Harper group.



*One memorable phrase is 'commitedly thrifty'.

First, you spell his name correctly

Jane Taber continues to cover that 'radical anti-Harper group', CRUSH.

The viewer who inspired a CBC poll on women in politics – and outraged Stephen Harper’s Conservatives in the process – is speaking out, arguing her question was neither partisan nor was it loaded or leading.

Mary Pynenburg, who is a two-time Liberal candidate in Britsh Columbia, wonders why she should have to “identify my party before I speak?”

“As a past candidate, I am very interested in women in politics,” she says.

And that was the subject of very non-partisan, uncontroversial poll suggestion.

So WTF is up with the CBC?

The CBC has dismissed the allegations of Liberal bias against their pollster, Mr. Graves. It noted it doesn’t “generally do a background check on people who have sent us non-contentious polling question suggestions,” but conceded the Pynenburg case “raises a good point about requiring closer attention to the background and affiliation of those who make submissions.”

BACKGROUND CHECKS? By the fucking CBC? To ask a question?

Ms. Pynenburg remains perplexed. First, she says the supposedly “radical anti-Stephen Harper group” is a Facebook group that is pointing out the Prime Minister’s “radical agenda.” She adds: “And that does not make them radicals it makes them caring Canadians.”

More importantly, she is curious as to how she became a Tory target for simply asking a question. “When did it become a cause célèbre in this country to ask a relevant and timely question affecting half the voting public?”

Well, Mary, you might be handicapped by your gender. You know, the Shut-the-Fuck-Up gender.

The canny but poor spellers at CRUSH, leapt on this and issued a press release.

"We were absolutely shocked to see this report" said Tina Naftali, a Montreal resident and spokesperson for C.R.U.S.H., a 3,000+ member group of Canadians organized through Facebook. "This is Canada, isn't it? Since when is it considered radical to criticize the government's performance?"

The group's Facebook page describes their objective as "A group of committed Canadians who want to exercise their democratic right to unseat Stephen Harper in a general election. Our central goal is to get out mainstream media ads that will reach out to as many fellow Canadians as we can and engage them in a discussion about the actions of Mr. Harper's government. The ads will focus on issues of trust, transparency, accountability, and democratic values".

To date, C.R.U.S.H. has published ads in a number of national and local newspapers including the Toronto Star and The Hill Times. The ads are funded solely through member donations. Ms. Naftali pointed out that all C.R.U.S.H. ads are viewable on their website at http://www.unseatharper.ca "I'll leave it to Canadians to examine the ads and decide if they are radical" commented Naftali.

"We are Canadians from all walks of life with members who identify with every political party or none at all" said Naftali, who went on to comment on low voter turnout in recent federal elections stating "politicians are concerned that Canadians are not engaged in the political process, however, it seems that by getting involved and engaging other Canadians, the government then labels you a radical".

In reflecting on this newly earned moniker, Naftali takes comfort in the words of Ghandi: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Aieeeee.

Radical Rally-ers!

On Facebook.

Really.

The ReformaTories are lashing out at a Facebook group, Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, or CRUSH.

The CBC-bashing continues unabated as Tory strategists uncover more revelations of so-called Liberal bias at the network.

Mary Pynenberg, the viewer who inspired a recent poll on women in politics, is not only a former Liberal candidate but is also a “radical anti-Stephen Harper group,” according to the latest internal Tory talking points. Oh, and she has donated $14,000 since 2004 to the Liberal Party.

(snip)

The latest is that Ms. Pynenburg is also the vice-president of the National Women’s Liberal Commission and “a proud member of Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper (CRUSH), a radical anti-Stephen Harper group,” the Tory missive says.

Of course, we CRUSHers are chortling over it.

And last week, as promised, I sent CRUSH another donation. I took it outta my MASSIVE tax refund, which was very satisfying. ReformaTories aren't going to spend my dough on self-congratulatory advertising. Instead, I get to spend some on advertising intended to help bring them down.

If you haven't heard about CRUSH, go check them out. I think it's a fascinating experiment in multi-partisan grassroots activism.

You are so NOT da bomb!

Obama: Stop telling the other delegates that you are. And look at me when I'm talking to you!

Yo Stevie! Barack is just not that into you, but circumstances oblige him to invite you to gatherings such as the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington DC, a 47-nation summit dedicated to keeping nuclear arms from terrorists.

Just lay off those KFC Double Downs, because your suit jacket looks as thought it's stretched to the point of exploding. And no, even that would still not make you "da bomb".

Go read what some other imaginative people thought that Obama could be saying to Stevie Spiteful at Canadian Cynic: Caption contest!

It's up to us

The mission of CRUSH, Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, a totally grassroots, multi-partisan group, is currently to run thought-provoking and revenue-generating ads in local mainstream newspapers (and to raise the dough to pay for them of course).

The group is clearly on a learning curve in media buying.

In March, they thought they had placed an ad in the high-visibility Saturday edition of the Calgary Herald. Expectant CRUSHers searched the rag without finding the ad. After some confusion, a wait until Monday business hours, and a double charge, it was revealed that the ad had run, but in the less-read Friday edition. Discussions -- and learning -- ensued.

Last week, there was another lesson (Scott has the details), this time concerning the Edmonton version of Metro. The group scored a coup in booking the outside back cover for Thursday at a pretty good price -- $1,000. Said price confirmed in writing. Press releases went out. Then, just before it was about to run, organizers were told that the ad was 'objectionable' and would not appear.

Discussions again ensued. Metro backpedalled. It would run the ad -- so how objectionable was is? -- but the price was now $2,500.

Huh?

The infamous/famous line was trotted out: 'Mistakes were made'.

More discussions. CRUSH declined the new offer and got their $1,000 refunded.

Now here's the good part. Organizers put out another press release detailing this adventure. The good people at the Hamilton Spectator sent an unsolicited offer to run a full-page ad at a discounted price.

W00t!

Now here's the ask. They don't have enough dough at the moment to take advantage of this interesting offer.

We realize we've begged on behalf of CRUSH before. Here we go again. If you're able, please consider contributing to this fascinating experiment in grassroots activism.

Our totally fucking useless Opposition isn't doing its job. It's up to us. Here's a way to help.

Also at that link is a summary of CRUSH's financial situation, accomplishments so far, and plans for the future.

And kudos to The Spec for standing up for freedom of expression. Well, OK, discounted freedom of expression.

CRUSH Goes Local, now with Paranoid Update

CRUSH, Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, is gaining momentum. From its Facebook wall:

Remember CRUSHERS, we have 3 ads in play this weekend.
1. The Calgary Herald (Mr. Harper’s riding)
2. The KW Record (hitting two Catch 22 ridings at once, that of Peter Braid and Stephen Woodworth)
3. A locally funded initiative in the Comox Valley Echo News that targets the Catch 22 riding of John Duncan.

Thank you all for making this happen. Work is progressing on future ads.

CRUSH is the totally grassroots campaign to place ads focusing on Stevie's record and 'trustability'. Originally, the plan was to run huge ads nationally. There was munny enough only for a smallish ad in last Saturday's Star.

Going local is a good idea. We all know the state of newspapers. Apparently, local CRUSHers were able to negotiate some good rates. And people read their local papers. CRUSHers hope these ads will get them talking.

The CRUSH site has downloadable PDFs, tips, and, of course, a way to donate. CRUSH hopes to continue to raise munny to funnel to the local groups and when I get my MASSIVE tax refund, I'm going to send them some more.

What's that reference to Catch 22 ridings, you ask?

Here's one of its organizers explaining at Rabble:

The Catch 22 Harper Conservatives strategy is to target winnable ridings with weak Conservative incumbents, recruit volunteers and communicate with voters before the next election is called. The main premise is that an informed electorate will vote in their own interests, and not strictly in the interests of political parties, politicians and lobby groups. The strategy will benefit some opposition candidates from the NDP, Liberals and possibly the Bloc while remaining independent of them.

Here are the 22 targetted ridings. Are you in one? Near one?

Now, while we're on the subject of targetting, the US National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws is going to make sure that those Blue Dog Democrats who so royally screwed the healthcare reform dealie over abortion PAY.

NARAL Pro-Choice America, which endorsed Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) primary challenger Wednesday, is eyeing other Democratic incumbents, too.

NARAL joined Planned Parenthood in backing former Charlevoix County Commissioner Connie Saltonstall in her weeks-old primary challenge to Stupak, a pro-life Democrat who inflamed party activists by holding out for abortion language in the recently passed healthcare bill.

But the group isn't done yet. Asked whether other Democrats who joined with Stupak or opposed the bill should be concerned, NARAL political director Elizabeth Shipp said, "Definitely."

I asked if NARAL was eyeing anyone specifically.

"Yes, but none that I'm ready to talk about yet," Shipp said.

I realize we don't have a primary system here, but man, it would be sweet to 'NARAL' these Harper Liberals:

Paul Szabo in Mississauga South

Dan McTeague in Pickering-Scarborough East

John McKay in Scarborough Guildwood.

Hmm, maybe my MASSIVE tax refund will stretch to funding NDP or Green opponents of these guys. Anybody know who might be running in these ridings?

PARANOID UPDATE:

CRUSH ADMIN NOTE: We have had bad news about the Calgary Herald. It appears from member feedback that the ad did not appear despite assurances that it would and, to add insult to injury, we have been charged twice for the ad. We have been attempting to contact the Calgary Herald all day but it will not be possible to speak with anyone in charge of this until Monday-we will keep you posted and rectify the situation as soon as possible.

CAPP's New Purpose

CAPP, Canadians Against Parliamentary Proroguing, is repurposing. With prorogation just about over, the group has become Canadians Advocating Political Participation, which keeps the original acronym, but I learned today, shares it with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. Oh well.

Here's the launch video.



Christopher White, founder of the original CAPP Facebook page, appeared at the Liberal roundtable today on parliamentary democracy, which was live-blogged by Kady.

One more thing. I won't repeat myself about what a fascinating experiment in new media organizing and activism this is, yadayada. But, if you're in the mood to play, it's time for the Money Test, aka, The Will This Be Taken Seriously? Test.

Make a Donation, Get a Reward

Do you share this view?

Stephen Harper says the Senate needs reform, but more Canadians think it's the Prime Minister's Office that has too much power.

With the Commons shut from December till March because Mr. Harper prorogued Parliament, a new poll shows 42 per cent of Canadians think the power of the PMO should be trimmed.

The survey, conducted by Nanos Research, finds Canadians retain the long-standing feeling that the Senate has more power than it deserves. But there's more concern about the Prime Minister's Office.

“It's not just the usual suspects,” said pollster Nik Nanos. “There are more Canadians that think the office of the prime minister is one of the parts of our democracy that requires a second look.”

The Nanos poll found that 42 per cent of Canadians think the Prime Minister's Office has too much power. Another 40 per cent say it's just right, and 9 per cent say it has too little power.

Yeah. I know. Polls, schmolls.

But if you are a regular reader of DJ!, you probably share our opinion that Stevie the Spiteful is the worst thing to happen to this country in a verrrry long time. Maybe ever.

So. What to do? I've yammered on about the grassrooty CAPP Facebook group and its offshoot CRUSH.

CAPP seems to have stalled -- at least in membership numbers -- and CRUSH (Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper) isn't exactly booming.

Here is CRUSH's vision:

Stephen Harper is increasingly strengthening the powers of the PMO and eroding the democratic rights of the people of Canada. It is time for a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons. It is time for the people of Canada to have their say in a general election!

Harper’s Offenses Against our Democratic Traditions and Institutions:

o Proroguing parliament to avoid facing a nonconfidence vote (2008)

o Proroguing parliament to avoid answering questions about the government’s handling of Afghan detainees (2009)

o Muzzling ministers, members of Parliament, and government watchdogs; stacking committees with political operatives

o Politicising federal institutions and programs that should represent all Canadians

o Avoiding questions by the media; restricting or denying access to information

o Using obstructionist tactics; employing American “spin doctors”

CRUSH is trying to raise enough dough to run nationwide newspaper ads calling for an election on March 3.

As I've said before, this isn't really about newspaper ads, or unseating Stevie the Spiteful -- lovely as that prospect is.

No. It's about The Money Test. The leaderless, totally grassroots, non-astroturfed CAPP put feet on the street on January 23, much to the chagrin of pundits and pols.

Now, simply, can it raise money?

I think it/we can collectively give the one-fingered salute to the ReformaTories and their running dog lackeys in the MSM.

If you have 5 or 10 bucks not otherwise committed, go get your checkbook or credit card. I'll wait. Remember, there's a reward. You'll like it.






You're back. Good. Those of you with credit cards and PayPal accounts, click here. For those of you with chequebooks, here's the info

Make cheques payable to: UNSEATHARPER.CA

Mail cheques to:
UNSEATHARPER.CA
BOX 1284 LAKEFIELD, ONTARIO
K0L 2H0

Thanks.

Here's the reward. It's not violence, it's therapy.

Would you pay $1.75 for democracy?

At Far and Wide, some thought on 'strategic electoral agreements' and why they probably won't happen. (Hint: $$$$$$$$$$$)

An article in the Vancouver Sun discusses this open letter by Philip Resnick and Reg Whitaker published at The Tyee.

Since it's an open letter, here's the whole thing (emphasis mine):

Time for Grits, New Dems, Greens to Make Electoral Deal

An open letter to Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton and Elizabeth May for an arrangement amongst the three opposition parties.

The three most recent federal elections have resulted in minority Parliaments. There are a number of reasons for this.

One: Stephen Harper was able to merge the Reform/Alliance and Progressive Conservative Parties in 2003, ending the split in right-of-centre votes and the artificial stranglehold over Ontario's Parliamentary representation that the Liberals had enjoyed during the Chrétien era.

Two: The Bloc Québécois, which first burst onto the scene in 1993, has turned out to have staying power. It has garnered between 40-49 per cent of the Quebec popular vote and between 40-54 seats in most of the six elections since then. The result is that the Liberal Party, which had been able to count on a strong Quebec contingent when it was Canada's "governing party" through much of the 20th century, has been reduced to minority status in that province.

Three: The NDP has come back from its near-collapse in the 1990s and can now count on popular support in the 15-18 percent range and between 25-40 seats in the Commons.

Four: The Greens have made their presence felt on the federal scene. Though they have not been able to elect an MP to date, they have begun to poll something approaching 10 percent of the popular vote.

Harper's tilted playing field

The split in opposition to the Conservatives -- four parties in Quebec, three in the rest of Canada -- plays beautifully into Stephen Harper's hands. Though the electoral vote for the Conservatives hovers around the 35 per cent range, the split in Opposition forces has allowed his party to achieve a plurality of votes and seats in the past two elections. The same pattern is likely to reproduce itself the next time Canadians go to the polls. Roughly 65 percent of Canadian voters do not want a Conservative government for a whole variety of reasons -- its contempt for Parliament and for an independent civil service, its poor environmental policy, its gutting of cultural programs, its weakening of Canada's international position as a respected middle power.

Yet they will find themselves forced to look on as the Conservatives continue to govern the country.

What is to be done? At the very least, the caucuses and leaders of the three opposition parties whose principal support lies outside Quebec need to discuss amongst themselves the possibility of not contesting a sufficient number of seats across the country so as not to split the anti-Conservative vote.

Much in common, much to gain

Although the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens have their own policies and programs, there is sufficient common ground amongst them to permit such cooperation.

One possible suggestion would be for the three parties in question to focus on 60-80 seats where a three-way split in opposition party votes has allowed the Conservatives to win ridings with fewer than 35 percent of the votes, or come within striking distance of defeating current Liberal or NDP sitting members. The party with the best-placed candidate in 2008 would then be able to run its candidate, with the others stepping down. To ensure the Greens some representation, in particular the seat where its leader chooses to run, the other two parties would give its candidate a clear run.

Agreeing to an electoral arrangement of this sort, or some variation thereon, would not mean that a formal coalition among the three parties would necessarily follow an election. But it would be important that the parties to the arrangement reach a modest set of agreed-upon common policies, even while continuing to differ on others.

Revive the coalition idea

A coalition would be a distinct possibility following an election, particularly if no single party will be able to form a majority government. There is nothing undemocratic about coalition governments. British Columbia had a Liberal-Conservative coalition between 1941-52. Great Britain had a coalition government between 1940-45. Australia and New Zealand have had coalition governments, as have most West European states, India, Japan, and a host of other countries in recent decades.

On Jan. 23, 2010 thousands of Canadians took to the streets to protest the proroguing of Parliament by Stephen Harper for the second time in two years. Those same Canadians and millions more who support their views are looking for a workable alternative to an electoral system that allows a party with little more than a third of the popular vote to ride roughshod over the views of a clear majority of Canadians.

We call upon the leaders of the Liberal Party, the NDP, and the Greens to heed the call for an electoral arrangement amongst them prior to the next federal election.

As Steve V at Far and Wide points out, though, parties get $1.75 for each vote cast for its candidates and the NDP would take the heaviest financial hit under this arrangement.

Well, how about this? If, in your riding, an agreement is made to run a candidate you normally would not vote for but you do to UNSEAT STEPHEN HARPER's gang, would you send $1.75 to the party you didn't vote for?

The people can make up the federal financing. The parties could set up PayPal accounts. We vote for the strategic candidate, come home, donate $1.75 and PRESTO! Money made up, centre-left government elected, all's good.

What think?

Feet on the Street? Check. Pay to Play? We'll See.

The creators of the Facebook group, Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, or CRUSH, have a new -- and still work-in-progressy -- website.

From it:

Harper’s Offenses Against our Democratic Traditions and Institutions:

o Proroguing parliament to avoid facing a nonconfidence vote (2008)

o Proroguing parliament to avoid answering questions about the government’s handling of Afghan detainees (2009)

o Muzzling ministers, members of Parliament, and government watchdogs; stacking committees with political operatives

o Politicising federal institutions and programs that should represent all Canadians

o Avoiding questions by the media; restricting or denying access to information


o Using obstructionist tactics; employing American “spin doctors”

We progressives/lefties/feminazis don't need no steenkin' links to all those crimes. Most of us have been blogging about them incessantly for four years.

For me, the most recent and craw-sticking examples are the disgusting exploitations of the Owe-lympics and the suffering in Haiti. And the embarrassment and insult of 'our' Olympic Shed too, of course.

This whole CAPP -- and its offshoot CRUSH -- movement is truly grassroots and it's a fascinating experiment in online activism.

It's still being dismissed -- despite the 60,000 feet on the street it organized on January 23 -- by pundits and politicians.

They're right about one thing though -- the next test is the money test.

Can we get pissed-off Canadians to open their wallets, chequebooks, and Pay Pal accounts?

Well, can we?

CRUSH now has a PayPay option.

Oh. Look. Another Shiny Desperate Thing

Totally despicable photo-opportunism.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who has made relief and reconstruction for Haiti a major cause for his government, will travel to the earthquake-ravaged nation on Monday to see the recovery efforts firsthand.

I sooooooo want this goon gone.

If you agree, put your chequebook where your heart and mind are.

And if the MSM had any integrity, they'd ignore it.

Yeah. I know. Fat chance.

What Would You Do to Unseat Stephen Harper?

Would you vote for a non-ReformaTory candidate?

Would you come out to a rally?

Would you write a cheque?

What will be the tipping point for Stevie Spiteful and his band of thugs?

Steve V at Far and Wide thinks it may be a turn by the National Post. We at DAMMIT JANET! hope it might be that travesty of the Canada Pavilion.

What would you do to help tip the damned useless opposition into forcing an election?

The people of C.R.U.S.H. (Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper) need money to publish nationwide ads calling for an election.

The goal is $30,000 to $40,000.

My goal is to get one DJ! reader to write a cheque and mail it.

Mine is on the kitchen table, in an envelope, stamped and ready to go.

WE ARE NOW READY TO ACCEPT CHEQUES BY MAIL
PAYABLE TO: UNSEATHARPER.CA
ADDRESS: UNSEATHARPER.CA

BOX 1284

LAKEFIELD, ONTARIO

K0L 2H0
******************************************************
THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO CONTRIBUTE BY MAIL
*****************************************...***************
PAYAPAL ANNOUNCEMENT TO COME LATER.
*******************************************************

Please.

You Knew This Was Coming

(mock-up of the proposed ad)


A CAPP offshoot group, C.R.U.S.H. - Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, has been created.

A group for concerned Canadians who are committed to exercising their democratic right to unseat Stephen Harper through a general election.

"When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent is frankly when it's rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.” - Stephen Harper, 18 April 2005"

Here is the story behind it.

Ted Chartrand wrote:
Joe Klebanoff asked some questions in a post below that deserve answers and I will attempt to provide more information on behalf of the group that organized this facebook group.

This group was the "brain child" of seven active members on CAPP that felt a focus needed to be brought to the next logical step in our dissatisfaction with the Harper government and that the next logical progression was an election so that the people of Canada could have their voices heard. Bear in mind, that this group was formed only 48 hours ago.

It was immediately seen that the objective of forcing an election needed to be taken outside the realm of simply a facebook group and out to the Canadian population. Two short term actions were identified:

1. An ad in Canada’s three major dailies: The National Post, Globe & Mail and Le Devoir. The focus of the ad would be the need for a general election. This will reach a large number of Canadians that are outside the “internet” world.

2. A national rally day (March 7) to foster active engagement by Canadians at large. The March 7 date was chosen as it will follow the delivery of the Throne Speech and budget but will be in advance of the budget debate and the first opportunity for a non-confidence vote.

Within these 48 hours since the facebook group’s creation, a team of 7 people have worked to create an appropriate ad and to negotiate with all of the named newspapers regarding rates. Others have examined various fundraising options and continue to do so. Both these tasks are nearing completion and will be posted on the facebook group page within the next day or so. While it is always preferable to have involvement of the many rather than the few, we are in a time crunch on this and must move quickly to take advantage of this small window of opportunity. Members of the organizing committee are also meeting with a number of local chapters to gain their support and involvement. This is a considerable amount that has been accomplished in less than 48 hours.

Regarding the use of a pseudonym, no one person alone was responsible for the idea for this facebook group, so, we melded our personae into Liberty Freeman, representing all of us. I am one member of that organizing committee. Increasing amounts of detail will be posted on the group facebook page in the coming days.

OK. Now they need the dough to run the ad. They are in the process of setting up the mechanics for that and need a volunteer lawyer or accountant.

Can you help?