A letter to the editor

The following letter will appear in The Hamilton Spectator on Monday, March 3rd. Published here for your reading pleasure...

Editor,

Re: Flaherty fails to deliver

The local NDP MP's opposition to this year's federal budget is irresponsible and unrepresentative of constituents' views, given some of its provisions.

In voting against the budget, the NDP are voting against permanent $32 million dollar gas tax payments for Hamilton, money this city desperately needs. They are voting against providing more money to hire police officers. Finally, they are voting against raising Seniors' Guaranteed Income Supplement exemptions to $3500. Is there something fundamentally wrong with these commitments that the MP's feel compelled to vote against?

This year's budget, while lean on handing out unaffordable 'pork' financial commitments, is appropriate for the economic uncertainty that currently plagues the country. The government is also legally bound to pay down the federal debt and this budget fulfills that obligation without diverting funds from other programs. Ontarians should know all too well how poor fiscal management during an economic downturn can quickly create a financial disaster thanks to the NDP government of the early 1990's.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty delivered a smart, no-risk budget that secures Canada's fiscal stability as we wade through tough economic times. The fact that Hamilton's NDP MP's are voting against this budget should show city voters just how their representatives feel about spending responsibly or spending with the intention of going into a deficit situation. I, for one, would rather short-term spending restraint and look forward to future prosperity rather than incurring a long-term, crippling deficit.

Regards,

-Alex Buck, Hamilton

Would be interested in comments on here. Start the discussion...

Christmas in February

Yesterday was Christmas morning for politics and sports watchers like myself with the 2008 Federal Budget being announced on the same day as the NHL Trading Deadline. While my interest in the NHL has waned in recent years, the Trade Deadline is still an exciting part of the NHL season as blanket media coverage (at least in Canada) hypes the event to election-like proportions.

And now for something completely different...politics! The Federal Budget is always a government's most important annual document and aside from the Throne Speech, is the determinant of policy for the next year. People who manage their own finances know all too well how difficult it is to keep track of the numbers, where revenue is coming from, and where it should go. Now, imagine that on a macro-level, national scale. The Federal Budget is always a thorough, well-planned document designed to give taxpayers value for their money while maintaining the government's books.

That said, with the economy heading for an uncertain 12 months, yesterday's Budget urged fiscal restraint and prepared the country for whatever transpires in the near future. I have no problems with this budget as it addresses the nation's needs and ensures that the cupboard will not be bare, despite what critics may say. It is always interesting to hear the opposition's take on the budget, especially the Bloc and NDP, when one considers that they have never tabled a national budget of their own (and we all know how the NDP managed Ontario's finances in the early 1990's). The fact that the Liberals supported the budget tells me that they're not ready for an election. Indeed, they only have 2/3 of their candidates nominated and are behind in fund-raising so an election now would be a losing proposition.

I will turn to the NDP and their opposition of this budget. As readers know, my riding is represented by an NDP MP as are 2 others in Hamilton. Their opposition to the budget is unacceptable. Indeed, they even came out before the budget and said they would vote against it. I thought the whole idea of electing MP's was so they could go to Ottawa and represent their constituent's views. Stating that you are voting against something before it is even tabled is not representing people at all.

When looking at what the NDP are going to vote against, one wonders what brain they are thinking with. After saying that they would stand up for seniors, the NDP are voting against extending the Seniors' Guaranteed Income Supplement, despite my local MP, Chris Charlton, saying that she supports the GIS. They are also voting against making the 1 cent federal gas tax payment to cities (to be used for infrastructure projects) permanent, despite campaigning for improving infrastructure. The budget also extends student grants for post-secondary students from middle income backgrounds to the tune of $430 million 4 years from now. Also for students: a continuation of the textbook tax credit, more money for research, and a significant scholarship for graduates of PhD programs. NDP MP's are voting against all of these program, even though they apparently stand for higher quality post-secondary education. Also, the NDP have voted against the new savings account that allows Canadians to contribute up to $5000 annually, which is sensible for all income brackets, completely tax-free. Instead of supporting fiscal responsibility for its own constituents, the NDP are saying that Canadians shouldn't be prudent with their money and just spend, perhaps into debt. How appropriate, the NDP telling people to spend, spend, spend when they don't have the means to sustain it. If anyone is curious about how the NDP would manage the nation's finances, their questions have been answered in this budget.

The people of Hamilton deserve better than this from their 3 NDP MP's. At a time when the nation's economic outlook is uncertain, the NDP are voting against a responsible budget that offers incentives to Canadians who are equally responsible with their own money. Their lack of representation on issues such as the 2008 Federal Budget smacks of hypocrisy when the most recent party propaganda leads with the headline 'Representation You Can Count On'. Hamilton Mountain cannot count on the NDP for effective representation and should vote against Chris Charlton in the next election.

Live from Arizona...

From what I hear it's cold, windy, and all-around miserable in Hamilton this week. As I'm in sunny, warm Arizona, I felt compelled to write a short bit on the US Presidential race.

Frequent readers will note that I was a supporter of Gov. Mitt Romney prior to him ending his bid for the White House two weeks ago. While I was disappointed, the writing was on the wall that he did not have a legitimate shot at winning this fall and it was in his best interests to step aside. Be that as it may, the presumptive GOP candidate became Sen. John McCain of, hello, Arizona. Here I am in the heart of McCain country, his bastion of liberal-Republican support. When I look at a lot of the people in this state, it's easy to see why they support Sen. McCain. He is older than most candidates, has children in the military, is a veteran himself, and speaks to middle of the road American values. That is all fine and dandy, but look at the flip side...

This morning I made a trip to Wal-Mart for groceries and there were literally dozens of seniors (70 years of age and up) that were working. Working! In their 70's! Something is wrong with that picture. These folks cannot even afford their prescription drugs yet are pointing people in the direction of the pharmacy. Even the greeter at the front door was sitting in a wheelchair and was obviously in poor health. Why are these people working? Their pensions are woefully inadequate and cannot cover basic expenses. So much for being the greatest country in the world.

You're probably wondering what this has to do with Sen. McCain. Here it is: Sen. McCain would continue to pour billions of dollars into Iraq while his own constituents starve and wonder when their 401(k)'s will ever be enough to live on. Seniors deserve the dignity of a good retirement after working hard for decades. Frankly, as a Conservative and Republican, I find it embarrassing that the GOP will line up behind Sen. McCain this November and trumpet his qualities. He may be a National Security hawk, but the economy is by far the most important issue facing the US right now and he does not have a clue how it works or how to manage a budget.

Americans would be well served to steer clear of Sen. McCain and choose Sen. Barack Obama for 4 years. While this is not an endorsement of support, I do believe that Sen. Obama can be a competent President and keep the seat warm for 2012 when Mitt Romney can take another run for the White House. At least then, Gov. Romney won't be fighting liberals from all sides in his bid to be the President.

I'll be back north of the 49th on Saturday. Until then...

Holding them to account: The NDP

An interesting bit of serendipity struck me on Tuesday that I feel compelled to blog about. Apologies for taking a couple of days to post this, had midterm exams on Wednesday and earlier this morning.

Tuesday afternoon, Parliament moved to pass the Tackling Violent Crime Act (TVCA) onto the Senate for long-awaited approval and passage into law. While this process should have been completed months ago, the Liberal-dominated Senate stalled the legislation until Prime Minister Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson forced the issue into a confidence motion. A smart, cagey political move on their behalf. Regardless of political party, I think everyone should be on side with tougher legislation on violent crime.

The Liberals refused to vote on this bill, instead making a spectacle of their dissent and marching out of the House of Commons. Shame. Their classless, weak-kneed approach to such an important issue speaks volumes about their policies and inability to see past their own rhetoric in order to pass a fundamental piece of legislation. Are these really the people you want governing the nation?

My issue is with the NDP, as usual. They voted against this bill, the only party to officially do so. While I give them credit for at least standing up and voting, it is beyond comprehension why they would disapprove of tougher crime laws. Violent crime is violent crime no matter what ideology you subscribe to. Children deserve the protection of raising the age of consent to 16. Gun crimes are heinous and serve no purpose but to harm our society and should be treated with the utmost strength of the law. Apparently the NDP feel differently. That is the true shame in all of this.

Now on to my blog topic, holding the NDP to account. On the same day that the NDP voted against the TVCA, I received in the mail a piece of pre-campaign literature from the NDP MP of my Hamilton Mountain riding, Chris Charlton. While littered with standard NDP propaganda, I found a glaring contradiction within. On the front page is a photo of Charlton with a Hamilton Police officer at a fundraising dinner, ironically entitled 'Officers Need Assistance'. Yes, Ms. Charlton, officers do need assistance. Through tougher legislation on violent crimes, police officers would be able to do their jobs and take dangerous criminals off of our streets. Instead, the NDP and Ms. Charlton voted against the Tackling Violent Crimes Act. That is not assisting officers, Crown Attorneys, and society at all.

Then, inside the newsletter is an outright lie about Charlton's support for tougher crime legislation. "I was proud to support bills in the House which imposed mandatory minimum penalties for firearms crimes, raised the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16 years, and placed the onus on those accused of firearms offences to prove why they should receive bail." That is a complete falsehood. Well done, Ms. Charlton. You voted against the Tacking Violent Crimes Act.

Now, with a federal election looming, the challenge is for Hamilton Mountain voters to expose Ms. Charlton for who she really is: a dishonest, ineffective MP who does not represent the views of her constituents and goes as far as to insult people's intelligence in order to get herself elected.

After this past week, I'm glad I'll be in Arizona for the next 7 days to relax and be recharged for the election because I promise to go all-out to ensure that Chris Charlton is not re-elected.

-AB

Happy Trails, Mitt

Alas, my only horse in the race for the White House in '08 dropped out earlier today. Mitt Romney 'suspended' his bid for President. As a supporter of Gov. Romney, I couldn't be more disappointed. Gov. Romney offered a true conservative alternative to the moderate, near liberal, style of Sen. John McCain (now the clear GOP front-runner) and would have been an excellent President.

For those who criticized his lack of experience on National Security, they seem to be forgetting that the President can nominate the best and brightest to serve in his Cabinet and not sacrifice any experience or judgment on a particular front. John F. Kennedy had Robert McNamara, Richard Nixon had Henry Kissinger, even George W. Bush had Donald Rumsfeld, all talented individuals who had an active hand in National Security and foreign policy. Gov. Romney is no fool, he would appoint a competent Cabinet and eventually learn the ropes of foreign affairs before too long.

All of this said, American voters will now choose 1 of 3 centrist candidates in the upcoming election. Senators John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama are by no means on the extreme ends of the political spectrum and perhaps represent a larger changing of the guard in the United States. Only time will tell just what that change means for the nation and the world.

From Super Sunday to Super Tuesday

As I continue to bask in the glory of victory from Super Bowl XLII (yes, I'm a Giants fan), I have been reminded by a certain, serious blogger (hello, Matt MacDonald) that my blogging needs to continue or else...

So, in the name of personal security, here I am.

Allow me to take this opportunity to say that Bill Belichick is the least classy individual on the face of the Earth. Worse than Bill Clinton (more on him shortly). 'The Hoodie', as he will be called, carries himself with as much class and grace as Jack Layton, and it's not much. He is an embarrassment to the NFL and coaches everywhere for his cheating, distasteful mannerisms on the sideline and off the field. From Spygate to the post-game handshake at the Super Bowl, The Hoodie demonstrated his inability to accept losing and be a man this season. Instead, he's a low-life punk, no better than some of the players he is supposed to lead. But hey, nobody's perfect, especially when they get beat by the New York Football Giants!!!!

I digress...

Now, to Super Tuesday. Those who know me are aware of my firm support for Governor Mitt Romney. He's a true conservative who knows how to lead and run an economy. If anyone has looked at the Business section of their local paper lately, they will know just how bad it is in the US of A. Frankly, a 71 year old moderate Republican with little domestic experience and questionable Senate record (that's you, Senator John McCain), should not be President of the United States. There are bigger problems in the world than the Middle East, namely why there are more Americans without health insurance than the entire population of Canada, and the price of gas and food continues to rise uncontrollably, that require a President with a handle on the economy. Governor Romney gets my vote (if I had one in the US, of course) and would be an ideal President.

As for the Democrats, if I had to choose between Senator Clinton or Senator Obama, the choice is not close. Barack Obama is a hands-down better candidate and would be a solid President. For many of the reasons that I've listed for Governor Romney, Senator Obama is miles ahead of Clinton. His policy on health-care is manageable and sensible, unlike the universal Medicare program that Clinton has been pushing since 1992. Take the hint, Hillary, people want to choose their own health-care program.

Also, the thought of another Clinton in the White House should make everyone shudder. The world has been through 20 years of Bush Sr.(4)-Clinton (8)-Bush Jr.(8) and another 4 under Hillary Clinton would be more of the same. She is nothing more than an extension of her morally bankrupt, sleazy husband and his policies. The Clinton name has been associated with controversy and scandal at every level of politics and professional life. How Bill Clinton did not end up in jail after the Whitewater scandal makes one wonder who he paid off. In addition, the leader of the free world must be someone who sets an example and offers more than just a charming, folksy smile and says nice things to voters.

Strong policy usually wins the day and the strongest candidates emerge from the pack eventually. This blog endorses Senator Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney as the Democratic and Republican nominees for President. Governor Romney would be the best overall choice for the United States in this November's general election.