Your Assignment, Should You Choose to Accept

Loyal DAMMIT JANET! readers, I have an assignment for you today.

I want you to send these two links to your cranky Uncle Bob and your tax-hating Cousin Laura and ask them if they are OK with this spending by the CONtempt Party government.

Item 1: Secret spending on consultants.

A Star investigation has found 90 per cent of the $2.4 billion paid out in the past decade comes with no description of the work done — and more than a dozen departments refuse to provide details when pressed.

Item 2: Economic Action Scam.

Those TV ads are still airing more than six weeks after the budget was read in Parliament.

Liberal MP Scott Brison said his research shows each single ad spot on CBC's Hockey Night in Canada is costing taxpayers about $95,000.

That's enough to pay the federal contribution toward 32 summer student jobs for the season, said Brison.

According the government's annual advertising reports and recent cabinet approvals, the Conservatives have spent at least $113 million on EAP-specific ads since 2009.

And that's not even counting the $3.1 billion missing in anti-terror spending, the egregious costs of War of 1812 commemorations, F-35 and other military boondoggles. Et fucking cetera.

If your fiscally conservative relllies start blubbering about AdScam, show them this.

[Sheila Fraser] found that $100 million was paid to a variety of communications agencies in the form of fees and commissions and said the program was basically designed to generate commissions for these companies rather than to produce any benefit for Canadians.

So. A hundred million dollars in AdScam brought down a government. Wanton and secretive misuse of BILLIONS of our money creates nary a blip in the Canadian consciousness.

I don't understand. Do you?

Image sources.

Rob Anders' CONvictions

Infamous for falling asleep whilst warming a CPC backbench in the House of Commons, Rob Anders "beaked off" recently.

There was the predictable fall-out and, as one journalist mused, there must have been some vigorous "arm-twisting behind the scenes" to get Anders to produce a classic CON non-apology.  He did not retract  his spurious claims nor admit he had made a mistake by advancing fallacious information, but instead stated his remarks were inconsiderate and insensitive.

In the meanwhile, two tweets from Glen McGregor were intriguing.  One referenced a piece he wrote in 2009 about CPC MPs who had openly pledged to remain virgins until they married.  The other tweet  raised questions.

Who is Karma MacGregor? You may well ask.

A long-time CPC political operative it seems, now traveling on taxpayers dime.  Is she Anders' significant other?

It's really not the public's business whether they engage in high-risk activities like eating steak tartare off each other's quivering nekkid butts or chastely worship together at Charles McVety's church, united in platonic commitment.  Privacy issues.

But if MacGregor was given this perk only because of her dedication to the cons, would that qualify as feeding at the patronage trough?

Here's a worthy challenge, NDP & LPC! (update)

How about joining forces to investigate whether this Con tactic is legal in Canada?

At doors I canvassed I kept hearing certain stories about how I spent too much time in Africa, or that my voting presence in the House wasn’t too impressive. When I informed them that I only spent one week a year on that continent (Sudan), and that I take it on my holiday time over New Years and on my own dime, I could sense the hesitation in their voice. “Oh … that’s not what we heard when the Conservatives phoned us last night.” Something that hadn’t been an issue heretofore was suddenly looming large in the final days. It was frustrating, but I didn’t know who to talk to. It was only when the election was over that a good Conservative friend informed me that they had actually been utilizing a central office for phone calls and that none of them emanated from London itself. They had poured big money from afar into influencing my riding. What I had thought to be a local campaign had suddenly taken on national dimensions.

I should have figured it out earlier. While the opponents from the other parties were front and centre in the campaign, the Conservative candidate had been AWOL, appearing at only one televised debate in the entire five weeks. Instead, the Conservatives opted for phone calls and signs – no replacement for flesh and blood candidates, but they were looking to win from a distance.

From here.

There were also documented calls to voters in specific ridings, deliberately creating the impression they came from Elections Canada, telling people that locations of polls had been changed when in reality they had ^NOT.

Thus does democracy crumble. Investigating and bringing criminal charges requires a united front, as well as a well-funded legal commando strike force.

If the Contempt Party financed these dirty tricks, they should be held accountable. After all, aren't they allegedly the *Tough on Crime* party?

Update: The Waterloo Region Record, which covered the attempt by Con staffer Michael Sona to disrupt a legitimate special polling station in mid-April, has more about the robo-calls.

Tom Deligiannis is a political science instructor who lives in Guelph but teaches at the University of Western Ontario in London. He received an automated call early Monday morning.

“I was skeptical at first because I follow elections very closely. And it’s highly unlikely Elections Canada would call the day of the election to make a change like that,” he said. “I was pretty upset by it all, actually. It seems to be a blatant attempt to manipulate the vote in some way.”

Deligiannis said he filed a complaint with Elections Canada. Deligiannis said he would never fall for such a tactic, but others, like his 70-year-old mother who moved to Canada from Greece, just might.

“The message has the potential to sound legitimate to some people, at least on the face of it. There is a reason it’s done,” Deligiannis said of the tactic. “It can confuse elderly citizens or new Canadians who maybe aren’t familiar with Canada’s democratic process.”

The penalty for being found guilty of such illegal actions is a maximum fine of $1000. That's not going to hurt the Contempt Party much. They probably spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on these dirty tricks, across Canada, in target ridings which evades the scrutiny of Elections Canada, since that money is likely off their books. The companies who provided the service are based in the US and they won't tell anyone who paid the Cons' bills.

Harper got his majority; his ReformaTories are laughing all the way to the bank, where they'll cash in the rewards the tar sands industry will provide to them. *Ethical Oil*, anyone?

CAPPers: This is your mission. . .

Should you choose to accept.

The wonderfully creative, grassroots, and multi-partisan people at CAPP have another fun project in the works.

On January 23, 2010, we showed up in tens of thousands in over 60 communities in Canada.

This time, we'll show up with even more.

On March 2, 2010, the last day of prorogation, Mr. Harper will be under the impression that we've all forgotten about his evildoing. Care to show him that not only do we still remember...that not only are we still ANGRY...but that WE WILL NEVER FORGET!

Ladies and Gentlemen...our mission for now shall remain a secret. The element of surprise is in our favour. They will never see it coming.

For now, consider this to be the secret headquarters for those Canadians who still have not forgotten.

Every Monday leading up to March 2, a clue will be revealed as to what our mission will be. For now, recruit your friends, your Facebook acquaintances and Groups, your family...everyone you know.

THIS IS A MISSION THAT WILL GO DOWN IN CANADIAN HISTORY.

DISCLAIMER: We do NOT condone violence. Bug the crap out of anyone who chooses to ignore that and message the admin ASAP.

The first clue has just been revealed.

And there's still time to send a Valentine to Stevie.

"Honour" killings and the murderer.

Last weekend I heard an interesting fact from a physician friend who works part-time as coroner in Toronto.

She told me the following: when police are called to the scene of an apparent death by hanging and the victim is a woman, they won't assume it was self-inflicted. The body will be removed with cord, rope, or materials seemingly used to cause death left intact so that the evidence can be examined by an expert. It appears that a high percentage of femicides by strangulation are covered up with evidence planted to suggest suicide. There are some knots that can't be tied by oneself. Post-mortem trauma is different, and a forensic scientist can identify the markers of physical injuries that distinguish a garroting inflicted by a second party.

Bad luck for Chris Little, then. His scheme to pin the "honour" killing of his estranged wife on someone else was doomed from the moment he started planning the double murders.

His defense lawyer John Rosen took an approach that required the demonstration that his client's estranged wife had "cheated" on him before they wed, during their marriage and after they separated. Rosen was hoping to show the jury that Little remained dispassionate about his partner's actions and to infer it was the "wronged" woman who had killed Julie Crocker.

The judge did not allow the prosecution to present character witnesses who would have countered Rosen's claims regarding Crocker and Menendez, nor evidence that would have revealed other aspect of Little's criminal behaviour, because the police obtained it in circumstances that violated Chris Little's Charter Rights.

... the jury didn't hear that Little apparently drugged and sexually assaulted Crocker while she was unconscious, something which was revealed in a court document obtained by The Star.

The jury also never saw the video of the attack, which police found hidden in a basement ceiling of the home where Crocker was murdered. Justice Michelle Fuerst ruled that York Regional Police violated Little's Charter rights in the search that unearthed the video and a pin-hole camera. Exactly when the apparent drugging and sexual assault occurred is not clear.

There are of course like-minded men who claim that Little was unjustly accused and unfairly held accountable for crimes that Crocker provoked with her "immoral" behaviour. That was the line of defense Little's lawyer pursued, and the comments posted wherever accounts of the trial were published are from men who believe that Little is innocent and/or justified in his actions. Those men probably wish Canada still had judeo-christian laws that would justify their particular sociopathic feelings towards women.

A sincere apology is even better.

From here:

Economists have found that companies who simply say sorry to angry customers fare better than those that offer financial compensation. The ploy works even though the recipient of the apology seldom gets it from the person who made it necessary in the first place.

The study was carried out by the Nottingham School of Economics' Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics. Academics set out to show whether customers who have been let down continue to do business after being offered an apology.

They discovered people are more than twice as likely to forgive a company that says sorry than one that just offers them money.

Others have discovered this "ploy" - as the bean-counters might call it - is particularly effective if in fact it demontrates a genuine sense of accountability on the part of the organization that presents it.

Health care practitioners are particularly concerned; malpractice insurance premiums in some medical specialties have led to a decline in the number of obstetricians, for example.

In order to navigate the question of the admission of responsibility and the subsequent expression of an apology, medical ethicists and jurists have studied cases and have tested scenarios.

Lee Taft, a former trial attorney and now an ethicist and expert on apology, believes that for an apology to be "authentic," it must contain the following ingredients: an acknowledgment that a rule has been violated; an admission of fault for its violation; an expression of genuine remorse and regret for any harm caused by the violation; and an explicit offer of restitution and promise of reform.

Taft further points out that the rendering of an authentic apology demands great courage from the party who has erred because that individual must not only acknowledge wrongdoing but also subject himself or herself to the consequences that result from the admission, including potential litigation. An apology that includes only an expression of sympathy without an admission of wrongdoing and offer of compensation is not an authentic apology. Rather, according to Taft, it is an "apologia," a term defined in the modern business environment as "a strategic communication designed not only to convey information, but more importantly, to neutralize the potential negative ramifications that might otherwise result from the information given."

An apologia, in other words, is simply a "full justification of one's position coupled with a defensive strategy." An authentic apology must include repentance, which encompasses two essential elements: the expression of sorrow and the admission of wrongdoing. The absence of either, concludes Taft, renders the apology incomplete and thus transforms it into a "botched apology."

Like this one? Fundamentalist religious zealots would often rather poison the well than apologize honestly and sincerely for the harm they do.

Fortunately, a growing number of compassionate health care professionals have chosen to approach the thorny issue of medical error pro-actively. My physician daughter tipped me off to this change in the way her colleagues are rising to the challenge.

Dr. Michael Woods, a surgeon in Colorado and author of ''Healing Words: The Power of Apology in Medicine," said his own experience a decade ago illustrates the impact of the traditional way doctors have handled mistakes. ... Now a consultant to doctors and the malpractice insurance industry, Woods said his research has shown that being upset with a doctor's behavior often plays a bigger role than the error itself in patients' decisions to sue.

Canadians are not as litigation-crazy as US citizens are. But beyond financial considerations, a genuine and heart-felt apology is a critical element in the healing process, whether a medical error is at cause or inhumane religious dogma as is too often the case with the Vatican Taliban.