The Expectations Game

I want to pontificate on the Canadian election for a moment...

If you had said to Paul Martin in November that he would be running a minority government, you would have been laughed out of the room.

If you had said the Conservatives would have increased their seat total across Ontario, you would have met a similar result.

My, how things change. Both have happened, but according to many media reports, the Conservative Party are the losers in the recent Federal Election.

Why? It's all about expectations. In the wake of positive tracking polls, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper was caught musing about carrying enough seats to form even a majority government.

For someone who had been running a quiet, "We're not the arrogant Liberals" campaign, this was the equivalent of poking a lion in the eye with a stick. Arrogant or not, it smelled like it. And that what was did them in.

The smear campaign launched by the Liberals and NDP was succesful, but not because of their clever adds or thoughtful strategy. Rather, it was Conservatives acknowledging front runner status which ALLOWED the smear campaign to succeed. In many ways, the Conservatives were victims of their own success.

As a result, Canadians are waking up to see headlines like Harper falls short in the Sun Media chain... rather than "Martin Slapped with Minority Government."

There are times when it certainly pays to run a "front-runner" campaign. But when you're the party dedicated to ending the reign of front runners, I would argue that this is not one of them.

Is Risk Bad?

And no, I'm not talking about the board game...

There is a lot of 'intuitive appeal' to the Precautionary Principle, hence it's popularity... the problem with the Precautionary Principle is when it's not applied in a common sense manner. And, therefore, paralyzing, banning the very steps that it mandates.

The Precautionary Principle is, unfortunately, a communications tool designed to prevent scientific development and/or acceptance on causes activists don't believe in. It's no more a risk alleviation process than the argument that cars can kill people, so therefore, don't invent the wheel.

Of course sensible societies take precautions, but they do so after balancing all of the relevant risks, not simply a few. Ordinary people are unlikely to do well if they always think, "Better safe than sorry." What is true for ordinary people is true for societies, too.


In essence, this boils down to one of my favourite expressions - Science is Irrelevant. Obviously, its not true if taken at face value, but when it comes to communicating the merits of emerging technologies, science serves as a support mechanism for those who can communicate more effectively in the first place. The Precautionary Principle is just one of those roadblocks which needs to be factored in.

Unfairenheit 9/11 - The lies of Michael Moore.

Whoa... every now and then, I'm accused of being a little harsh. But hey, at least I'm not accusing Michael Moore of "abject political cowardice."

Wow: "To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery."

Ahhh.. the Good Old Days of Eco-Terrorism

It's nice to see Greenpeace getting back to their old familiar roots... Police just arrested 12 protesters after they hijacked a cargo ship carring genetically-modified animal feed.

This is NOT Politics 101

Apparently, some folks in the NDP must have missed the class in candidates college... you know, the class where they tell you not to publicly disagree with Party policy when there's less than a week to go before an election.

Then again, this IS the NDP... proving that some parties will never, ever, ever have a position of power. Thank goodness.

Forget Global Warming...

I've finally figured out what's going to cause the end of civilization as we know it. And just because I'm a nice guy, I'm going to share it with you.

Ready?

We are. That's right - I'm finally conceding that we may in fact, be stupid enough to end our very own civilization. And I can even offer proof - the movie "Dodgeball" was the #1 movie across North America this weekend.

If we are so farm animal stupid as to pay good money to watch stuff like a coach forcing his players to duck metal wrenches to hone their dodging skills, then perhaps we deserve what fate we reap upon ourselves!

OK - rant over. Chat amongst yourselves.

Poll: Few watched debate

It's an election year in both the USA and Canada. American's take note - the election debate changes nothing. According to a Leger Marketing Study, the debates draw anemic ratings and change nothing.

My proposal is this - rather than force people to sit through several hours of boring television, why don't the leaders of their respective political parties merely debate each other in a TV studio? Then all the media pundits can declare a winner, and we can watch a 10 minute high-lights version after the local news.

After all, in this era of processed food, instant coffee and no-money-down instant gratification, it only makes sense that we'd have instant politics.

Framing the Fish Farmers...

The Atlantic Institute for Market Studies has just released a research paper, entitled "Framing the Fish Farmers: The Impact of Activists and Public Opinion on the Aquaculture Industry."

You might recognize the author's name.

Let me summarize - although it is a light read...

Public opinion in aquaculture is driven by activists. The industry is handcuffed, and must respond or continue to face increasing regulatory and media pressures.

The aquaculture industry is in trouble... it will be interesting to see how it responds.

Better Farming - Cover Story

Little bit of tooting my own horn here. I was interviewed by Better Farming Magazine this month. My message is consistent - the agricultural community had better get ready for increased criticism and critical exposure. As it stands right now, they're not ready -- and it's coming.

Small Games for Small Minds

There's a great news website for Canadian political junkies, run by a guy in Ottawa named Pierre Bourque.
If you're not Canadian, you may be unaware of the fact that we're in the middle of a Federal Election. And apparently, Pierre has just about had it with the ongoing Liberal attacks on the Conservative Party...

The diatribe on the front page of his site reads:

-----------------------
"It's a question that begs asking. Why on earth do the seasoned political veterans piloting Paul Martin's braintrust insist on referring to their main opponents as the 'Alliance-Conservatives' ? One example among a boatload, today's 5:57 PM 'Open Letter to Alliance-Conservative Leader Stephen Harper from Liberal candidate Glen Murray', the contents of which aren't worth a moment's thought. C'mon, Dave, Steve, Mike, Scott, myriad adjuncts and 'at loose end' oxygen-intake zombies, show some class. You're all bigger than that, aren't you ? You're supposed to be working to elect the Prime Minister of our country, act like it. Yes, we get it. Alliance-Conservative. Merged. Yup. But is that as good as you can be, resorting to petulant schoolyard name-calling in each and every press release emitted from the Liberal high-command ? Or were you all out of town when the PC-CA merger went through and to this day you think it's shocking news to one and all ? Grow up, for God's sake, you're on the verge of flushing a Liberal dynasty down the toilet and you should have bigger fish to fry, not the least of which should be a healthy respect for the opponent who is currently kicking your collective posteriors from sea to shining sea."
-------------------------

Go Pierre! Kick butts, take names.

Stop the insanity...

I swear you can't make some of this stuff up. The United Nations releases a report that says, in essence, GM food is safe to eat. It's good for the developing world, it's good for the economy, it's safer for the environment, etc. etc. etc.

This is what I've been saying for years, so forgive me if I gloss over the arguments. But what ASTOUNDS me is the reaction of Greenpeace to the report. Doreen Stabinsky, Greenpeace spokeswoman, says “Hunger is not a problem that needs technical solutions. It needs political will and appropriate policies.”

And just WHAT are those appropriate policies? Would that be fear mongering? Would that be shutting down a debate on the merits of genetically modified foods and not allowing speakers to make their presentations? Would that be draping giant "Frankenfood" or "Frankenfish" banners on food manufacturing facilities.

I'm all for a debate on the proper place of GM foods in society - but only if organizations like Greenpeace would allow us to actually HAVE the debate.

The hypocrisy coming out of organizations like this astounds me at times.

The Gipper is gone...

"I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead."

A great man, a great thinker, and a great President. Thank you, Mr. Reagan.

Ronald Reagan - 1911-2004.

June newsletter is up.

On the power of a good, genuine apology. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone from the Royal Bank of Canada is on my subscription list. :)

What's wrong with democracy?

Call me naive, but I don't really understand the charge that abortion rights are at stake in the upcoming Canadian election.

Stephen Harper, the Conservative Party leader, has merely said that IF the issue comes up in the House of Commons, he will allow MP's to vote on it as they wish. Isn't that what democracy is all about?

Instead, we're all subject to screams of hidden agenda's and abortion rights being at stake.

First off, without wanting to turn this into a pro-life/pro-choice debate, the fact is, legally there are no abortion rights in Canada. There is no legislation, period. Secondly, isn't an open vote the exact OPPOSITE of a hidden agenda???

Why are they so afraid of an open vote?

Apologies, and genuine apologies.... there are differences.

OK... so the Royal Bank of Canada says they're sorry for managing to screw up everyone's bank account at month end... They're doing so by promising no one will pay service charges on cheques that erroneously bounced, or other problems like that.

That's not apologizing. That's simply getting things back to even. Fact is, they still screwed up, and therefore in the eyes of the public, still "owe them one."

Especially since three days earlier, they reported $774 million in profits.

Nice timing.

To suck or not to suck, that is the question...

OK, according to this column from ABC news, apparently we all suck but think we're good, or we're good but think we suck.

I don't know what's worse.

Shocking news...

According to this story, fed-up Canadian voters don't believe political promises any more. I'm sorry - but why does this merit mentioning? Is this news? Tune in next week, as the media breaks the juggernaut "NASA puts man on moon!" story as well...

The Day After Tomorrow - Favourite Movie Reviews...

I got the chance to see everyone's favourite big budget global warming fear-mongering flick last Friday night. I think it's best summarized in some of the following reviews...


Steven Hayward, Houston Chronicle - "The Day After Tomorrow is to serious environmental thinking about climate change what Hogan's Heroes was to serious representation of World War II prison camp experiences.

Peter Howell, Toronto Star - "Long before Dennis Quaid stares up at a frozen Statue of Liberty in the climate-change thriller The Day After Tomorrow, concerned moviegoers may feel moved to cry out like Charlton Heston in Planet Of The Apes: "Damn you all to hell!" The damnable "you" being not just writer/director Roland Emmerich, the uberschlockmeister who long ago should have surrendered the keys to the digital toy box, but also all the Hollywood suits who green-lighted this Greenpeace of crap."

Christian Toto, Washington Times - "Popcorn movies can be logically challenged, even a tad daffy at times. "The Day After Tomorrow" wears its lobotomy scars like a badge of honor."

David Edelstein, Slate.MSN.com - "Of course, if I had to catalog all the moronic plot turns in The Day After Tomorrow, we'd be here until the next ice age. It's just so very bad. You can have a pretty good time snickering at it—unless, like me, you think there's something to this global warming thing, and you shudder at the irony of a movie meant to warn people about a dangerous environmental trend that completely discredits it."

Oh - and by the way - my ultimate favourite comes from the National Geographic - "So should we brace ourselves for another ice age?
No, I don't think so. The scenario in the movie is fictional. Like some other Hollywood movies that claim to be based on true stories, there's a kernel of truth that is then pumped full of steroids and given cosmetic surgery."