Posts from our progressive community

The Moon

LeDaro - Sat, 08/09/2014 - 06:35
Last night the Moon was closet to the Earth. I took the picture below by a tablet. I understand it happens once a year.

Is "Trickle Up" Back?

Northern Reflections - Sat, 08/09/2014 - 06:27

On Thursday, Paul Krugman wrote that evidence is mounting to support the notion that inequality can sabotage a market economy. There will always be some inequality in market economies. But gross inequality is a drag on economic growth:

It’s true that market economies need a certain amount of inequality to function. But American inequality has become so extreme that it’s inflicting a lot of economic damage. And this, in turn, implies that redistribution — that is, taxing the rich and helping the poor — may well raise, not lower, the economy’s growth rate.
Neo-Conservatives, of course, believe redistribution is immoral. However:

Earlier this week, the new view about inequality and growth got a boost from Standard & Poor’s, the rating agency, which put out a report supporting the view that high inequality is a drag on growth. The agency was summarizing other people’s work, not doing research of its own, and you don’t need to take its judgment as gospel (remember its ludicrous downgrade of United States debt). What S.& P.’s imprimatur shows, however, is just how mainstream the new view of inequality has become. There is, at this point, no reason to believe that comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted is good for growth, and good reason to believe the opposite.
And the IMF has reached the same conclusion:

Specifically, if you look systematically at the international evidence on inequality, redistribution, and growth — which is what researchers at the I.M.F. did — you find that lower levels of inequality are associated with faster, not slower, growth. Furthermore, income redistribution at the levels typical of advanced countries (with the United States doing much less than average) is “robustly associated with higher and more durable growth.” That is, there’s no evidence that making the rich richer enriches the nation as a whole, but there’s strong evidence of benefits from making the poor less poor.
Krugman cites Food Stamps -- the bugbear of conservatives -- as an example of redistribution that works:

Consider, for example, what we know about food stamps, perennially targeted by conservatives who claim that they reduce the incentive to work. The historical evidence does indeed suggest that making food stamps available somewhat reduces work effort, especially by single mothers. But it also suggests that Americans who had access to food stamps when they were children grew up to be healthier and more productive than those who didn’t, which means that they made a bigger economic contribution. The purpose of the food stamp program was to reduce misery, but it’s a good guess that the program was also good for American economic growth.
And, if Krugman seeks more evidence that inequality is a drag on the economy, he need look no further than Canada. Since Stephen Harper gained a majority of seats in the House of Commons in 2011, he has taken a knife to government spending. This week, Canadian employment numbers were released. In the month of July, the Canadian economy produced 200 jobs -- that's not a misprint, those are two zeroes.

Perhaps "trickle up" is making a come back.

Imagine If Our Politicians Had This Kind Of Honesty And Integrity

Politics and its Discontents - Sat, 08/09/2014 - 05:55
The Irish Senator and internationally recognized human rights activist, David Norris, delivered an eminently powerful speech concerning Gaza in the Irish Parliament on, July, 31st. In his speech Norris criticizes human rights violations of Israel carried out with the support of the United States and complacency of the international community.

Said Norris:

“I am not anti-Israeli, I am not anti-Semitic. I supported the state of Israel. In the forty years I have known the state of Israel and sometimes had a home there I’ve seen it completely changed. It changed from a left-wing socially directed country, to an extreme right-wing regime, that is behaving in the most criminal fashion and defying the world. Using – unscrupulously using – the Holocaust to justify what they are doing and it is time that rag was torn away from them.”

The video of his speech follows. Can you imagine any of our politicians speaking so forthrightly and with such impassioned integrity?

H/t AddictinginfoRecommend this Post

A Good Start

Politics and its Discontents - Sat, 08/09/2014 - 04:33

A post from MoS, the Disaffected Lib:

Major European countries are proposing a UN mission to Gaza aimed at lifting the siege of Gaza while dismantling Hamas' tunnel network and rocket arsenals. From Foreign Policy:

It remains unclear whether the European plan has the support of Hamas, Israel, or the United States. It does, however, include several elements the Obama administration believes are essential, including the need to ease Gazans' plight, strengthen the role of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, and ensure the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip.

The plan -- described in a so-called non-paper titled "Gaza: Supporting a Sustainable Ceasefire" -- envisions the creation of a U.N.-mandated "monitoring and verification" mission, possibly drawing peacekeepers from the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO), which has monitored a series of Israeli-Arab truces in the region since the late 1940s. The mission "should cover military and security aspects, such as the dismantling of tunnels between Gaza and Israel, and the lifting of restrictions on movement and access," according to the document. "It could have a role in monitoring imports of construction and dual use materials allowed in the Gaza Strip, and the re-introduction of the Palestinian Authority."

The key aim of the initiative is to help the Palestinian Authority gradually assume military, and political, control over Gaza, which has been administered by the militant group Hamas since 2007. The paper -- which was drafted by Britain, France, and Germany -- could serve as the basis for a U.N. Security Council resolution.

It sounds like a good plan, provided it leads to the restoration of the West Bank to Palestinian control and a return to Israel's pre-1967 borders.Recommend this Post

The Harper Regime's War on the Wounded Children of Gaza

Montreal Simon - Sat, 08/09/2014 - 00:15

The other  day I told you about a tiny candle of decency in the darkness that is Gaza.

Ontario's plan to bring wounded children to be treated in the province's hospitals. 

The Ontario government is willing to provide medical care to 100 injured children from Gaza, it said Tuesday – several days after a Palestinian-Canadian doctor made a public plea to bring kids to Canada for treatment.

And I said that was MY Canada.

But sadly my Canada isn't Harperland, and the Cons are no better than beasts. 
Read more »

Musical interlude

accidentaldeliberations - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 20:00
Iris - Lose in Wanting (Lovett's Sonar Eclipse Edit)

Ethics Watchdog May Investigate Harper's Inner Circle

Montreal Simon - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 15:56

Well I'm glad to see that Senategate might not be just a one shot made for TV movie. Where we only get to hear from selected members of the Con mob.

It may be a much longer series where we get to hear from just about EVERYONE in Lord Harp's inner circle.

The Commons' ethics watchdog says she may investigate several members of the prime minister's inner circle who were involved in the scheme to cover up a $90,000 payment from Stephen Harper's then-chief of staff Nigel Wright to then-Conservative senator Mike Duffy.

And I mean EVERYONE.
Read more »

It's Called "Nuisance Flooding"

Politics and its Discontents - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 09:47

Posted by MoS, the Disaffected Lib:

It's the latest term spawned by climate change - "nuisance flooding." According to Insurance Journal, nuisance flooding is the periodic flooding being experienced due to rising sea levels.

Eight of the top 10 U.S. cities that have seen an increase in nuisance flooding - which causes such public inconveniences as frequent road closures, overwhelmed storm drains and compromised infrastructure - are on the East Coast, according to a new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) report.

This nuisance flooding, caused by rising sea levels, has increased on all three U.S. coasts between 300 and 925 percent since the 1960s, the report says.

Annapolis and Baltimore, Maryland, top the list along with Atlantic City, New Jersey; Philadelphia and Sandy Hook, New Jersey. Other cities include Charleston, South Carolina; Washington, D.C.; and Norfolk Virginia.

What is a nuisance today could become something far more destructive in the not too distant future as sea level rise accelerates. At least one analysis suggests we could see up to 2.5 metres of sea level rise by 2040 which would mean a rapid increase beginning over the next few years.

For the most part, sea level rise is a problem we don't seem to talk about. Coastal residents should ask themselves when was the last time they recall sea level rise being discussed by their municipal, provincial or federal representatives? When was it debated on the floor of the House of Commons? What planning is underway? What funding has been allocated to deal with this threat? How much sea level rise do they foresee by when? What do they mean to defend, what do they expect to abandon to the rising sea?

The American example is disturbing. There we find little political will to even acknowledge the problem. Miami, for example, already sustains far worse than nuisance flooding on a regular basis. It cannot be defended and yet municipal and state authorities are doing nothing to rein in new development. Former New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg, did commit the city to a major flood protection programme but even that may prove inadequate.

How will coastal Canada cope? I haven't got a clue and neither, apparently, do our elected officials. From documents I've read, low-lying municipalities in the Vancouver suburbs (much of Richmond is already well below sea level) are planning little more than raising their sea walls a metre or two. What do they do when high tides swell the Fraser River to overflow its banks?

Why aren't we talking about this? The answer is easy and powerful. Talking about sea level rise leads to any number of questions that can have immediate ramifications. What's the value of a multi-million dollar waterfront property that may well be submerged in two or three decades hence? What will be the toll on urban and suburban infrastructure? How do we decide what we will attempt to defend, what we will abandon? Who wins, who loses? Who pays, who collects? Decisions, decisions. Oh dear.

Recommend this Post

Friday Morning Links

accidentaldeliberations - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 08:54
Assorted content to end your week.

- Jenna Smialiek reports on Gabriel Zucman's conclusion that the .1% has managed to prevent the rest of us from even approaching reasonable estimates as to how much wealth is being hoarded at the top. And Bryce Covert discusses how that carefully-cultivated lack of knowledge figures to distort policy debates.

- Meanwhile, Emily Schwartz Greco and William Collins note that even slight positive news for most of the population - such as modest employment growth in the U.S. - is being treated as a catastrophe by Wall Street since it could result in wealth being shared:
For the first time since 1997, the U.S. economy just added at least 200,000 jobs per month for six months running. GDP grew at a 4 percent annual clip between April and June. The percentage of Americans who describe the economy as “good” has climbed to the highest level of President Barack Obama’s presidency.

Who wouldn’t rejoice over these happy milestones on the bumpy road to a real recovery?

Wall Street. On July 31, within hours of the release of a bunch of sunny indicators, stocks sank more than they had on any day since early February. The decline wiped out all gains the S&P 500 stock index had racked up over the month.

Global instability contributed to the sharp drop, but so did investors’ fretting over indications that workers are finally getting higher wages and more benefits.
(W)hy exactly does Wall Street tank on news portending economic gains for most Americans? Don’t people with extra money in their pockets boost the economy when they spend more freely? Isn’t it something worth celebrating?

Not in an economy that caters to the rich. - Peter Moskowitz offers a useful primer on tailings ponds, while Bob Weber reports on the Harper Cons' continued refusal to allow anybody to assess the dangers posed by the ones set up by tar sands operators. Barbara Yaffe chimes in on the lack of reason for confidence in environmental regulation at every level of government. And David Atkins recognizes that we're up against "Mordoresque" forces looking to keep dirty energy business booming at whatever cost necessary to the environment and the rest of humanity.

- Devon Black writes that the Cons are looking to censor opposing voices through any means available - including by imposing gratuitous audits on charities who dare to take up social causes.

- But Rick Salutin theorizes that the Con's focus on breaking systems and organizations which reflect Canadian values hints at their recognition that they'll never actually win if those values serve as the basis for public policy:
I wonder obsessively myself about Stephen Harper's efforts to reshape the Canadian character. I think he thought it was all due to media influence, but he's won that battle. He was endorsed by every paper in the country except the Star last election. Yet attitudes persist. He can still legislate massive changes, and does, but has he despaired of deeper, attitudinal change?

On reality barriers

accidentaldeliberations - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 08:31
Shorter Brian Crowley:
It turns out that finding "facts" and "evidence" about mythical trade barriers is tougher than I'd realized. In light of this adversity, can't we just agree to accept my unsupported assertions as fact, and impose the most extreme anti-government policy my corporate benefactors can imagine in response?

Critics also have a Right to Free Speech

The Winnipeg RAG Review - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 08:30
Twitter screen shot: Charles Adler's response
after being shown that Candace Maxymowich
was clearly using abortion & abstinence only "education"
as campaign issues.
After her attempt to woo social conservatives backfired, school trustee candidate Candace Maxymowich and her apologists have been touting out "free speech" and her "right to have opinions" to counter critics. This is standard fair for whenever a fringe social conservative shoots their mouth off and says something absurd. The "right to free speech" crowd immediately jumps in, as if a right to free speech entailed a right to be sheltered from other views.

This is not real free speech. The right to free expression applies both to the socially conservative fringe and mainstream critics. Critics of Candace Maxymowich's "personal opinions" in favour of abstinence only "education" and Forced Birth have the right to express their dissenting views.

This right includes the right to explain how utterly bad as policy abstinence only "education" is and how awful Forced Birth is from a public health standpoint. It also includes the right to freely state how utterly morally repugnant they view the values of subordinating women's control over their own bodies and embracing ignorance inherent in the two positions are.

As someone in the public sphere and certainly as someone running for elected office Candace Maxymowich doesn't get off the hook from criticism simply because she has "free speech". She'll have to defend her views, recognize the free speech of critics and accept the electoral consequences as they prove that her views are without merit. 

Liked this post? Consider liking us on Facebook and following The Analyst on Twitter.

Why I Stopped Calling Myself A Progressive

JOE FANTAUZZI Thoughts about power - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 06:55
Progress can mean a lot of things. The achievement by marginalized people of social citizenship. Collective movement toward big goals that make life better on a societal scale. State intervention with the aim of lessening the burden caused by the market. Smoke from an oil field and tailing ponds as the economy chugs along. Progressivism is typically identified […]

It's Not Working

Northern Reflections - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 06:36


Justin Trudeau's autobiography will soon hit the bookstores. It's probably been ghost written and -- because it's appearing now -- it's a blatantly political document. Predictably, Conservatives are not impressed. Tasha Kheiriddin writes:

Writing an autobiography at a young age is fine if your experiences give you something valuable to teach others. Malala Yousafzai is 16, but she survived getting shot in the head while campaigning for girls’ education rights in Afghanistan. Anne Frank was only 13 when she went into hiding from the Nazis during the Second World War.
The problem, she writes, is that Trudeau hasn't done anything:

He owes his current position in federal politics to the cachet of his family name; those who pretend otherwise are kidding themselves. While Trudeau has matured as a politician over the past few years, his resume remains woefully thin for someone aspiring to the highest office in the country. Had he not been the son of the most revered Liberal politician of the past fifty years, he wouldn’t have gotten the chance.

To become a true leader — his own man — Trudeau needs to transcend his past, not venerate it. Which is why his book’s title, and its subject matter, are so perplexing.
I'm old enough to remember when the same complaint was made about Justin's father. And, even though I'm not old enough to remember, the same complaint was made about Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  I'm not sure what kind of leader the younger Trudeau is. Truth be told, I'm unhappy about his support for KeystoneXL and his one sided take on what has been happening in Gaza.

But Kheiriddin's knock against Trudeau is getting stale. And it's not working.

Power Of The Press?

Politics and its Discontents - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 05:59

Recently, I wrote a post about Salma Abuzaiter, the eight-year-old girl whose family moved to Canada from Gaza and became Canadian citizens five years ago. Having accompanied her father, a physician, back to Gaza this summer so he could render medical assistance while she visited with her cousins and grandparents, Salma became trapped there after the latest outbreak of hostilities with Israel. Despite requests for some small logistical assistance from the Canadian government, her mother, in Brantford, initially received no response, later being told by Canadian officials in Ramallah that they were too busy to help.

As reported in the Toronto Star, they recommended Salma board a bus for a five-hour ride from Gaza City to Jordan, part of an “assisted departure” arranged by the Canadian government for its citizens. But Abuzaiter feared the bus plan would be unsafe for a young girl travelling alone.

But things changed, and the story appears headed toward a happy ending, without doubt due to the unpleasant light cast on indifferent Canadian officials by the press. Salma's mother reports:

During a recent break in the violence, ... Salma was escorted by her father, a doctor working in the country, to the Israeli border to meet with two female Canadian government officials, who helped her board a plane in Amman, Jordan, to Toronto.

“I never asked the government for financial help, just logistical help,” said Abuzaiter, who is paying all of the girl’s rescue expenses.

“When they told me they could take care of Salma and send representatives to her, I couldn’t stop crying.”

Sometimes, just sometimes, there is a light that is able to dispel the seemingly perpetual darkness enwreathing our government under the current regime.

Recommend this Post

The Moral Righteousness of the Harper Cabal. . . .

kirbycairo - Fri, 08/08/2014 - 05:19
Understanding anyone's motivations is a notoriously complex matter. One must always deal with the question that sociologists would refer to as "dramaturgical sincerity." In other words, when someone talks about their actions, one can never be entirely sure to what degree the person is being honest about their motivations and to what degree they are simply "playing a role." This question becomes increasingly complex in the public sphere as people spin their actions for public consumption. Honesty and sincerity in politicians is a rare commodity and 'spin' is almost always a matter of course. However, if one is willing to be fairly non-partizan (another rare trait), much political spin is easy to see through. Much of the time one need merely ask the question cui bono to know what is really going on. But political spin becomes an even more murky business when the politicians in question live on the edge of significant mental disturbance. In recent North American history we need only to look back to the strange, sometime eerie, figure of Richard Nixon to see how bizarre and complex a mentally disturbed political leader can be. What drove a pathologically paranoid man like Nixon, for example, to undertake his remarkable diplomatic efforts in China, while at the same time, as we later found out, he was turning the White House into a nest of law-braking psychopaths who talked on tape about stringing people up with piano wire? These are deep waters that are by no means easy to plumb.

These questions bring us to our own paranoid PM and his little band of psychopaths, like John Baird and Jason Kenny. What really motives this groups of men in suits is often impossible to understand as they continually funnel their apparently narcissistic and dissociative disorders into various legislative channels. A great deal of speculation has been expended on, for example, the question of Harper's bizarre Millenrian-like, remarkably one-sided, support of Israel. Is he motivated by simple vote-grubbing, or by his evangelical beliefs, by a shockingly simplistic misunderstanding of historical events, or by a mentally disturbed desire to see complex issues in a completely black and white manner? Similar question revolve around Harper's reaction to the issue of the growing war in Ukraine. What, for example, leads a guy like Harper to cozy up to the Chinese regime, unquestionably one of the most brutal, human-rights violating, and dangerous governments in the world, while condemning the Russian government in such a simple, black and white way? I certainly believe that any explanation for this apparent dichotomy that appeals only to vote-hunting is totally inadequate.

One thing seems clear to me: Harper and his crew demonstrate their near psychopathic mind-set in dealing such as the Ukraine question. As Harper attempted, in what, on a world stage, looks like a rather sadly pathetic attempt, to wield the sword of Canadian power by enacting various sanctions on Russia, his mental simplicity and animal-like puffery has become increasingly apparent. But yesterday, the depth of Harper's instability became clear when Russia retaliated with sanctions of its own. As one listened to the words coming out of the Harper cabal, one got the distinct impression that they were genuinely surprised by Russia's retaliation. Their surprise is, perhaps, motivated by a child-like simplicity that expresses itself in the notion that when one is so sure that one is on the right side of an issue, one's opponents wouldn't dare retaliate. You can almost see Harper and his ministers thinking to themselves "how can Russia dare retaliate when they are so clearly in the wrong?" Like truly incompetent politicians, Harper and his henchmen seem to really believe that they simply have to wave their magic wand of moral righteousness and whatever problem is at hand will simply vanish in a puff of saintly rectitude. They revealed some of their simplicity and disingenuousness yesterday when they said that the Russian sanctions wouldn't hurt the Canadian economy and then, almost int he next breath, said that they can't only consider economic questions when making foreign policy.

The Harper regime's madness is of the kind that is notoriously dangerous when it comes to democracy. When people are suffering from a pathological narcissism and dissociative illness, they tend to go off the rails when the world fails to conform to their simplistic righteousness.  When things don't go their way, such people have a terrible time accepting that they interpreted things wrongly or that the people turned against them. Rather, like Nixon, they look for conspiracies and satanically-induced plots for their failure. This is the stuff that coups are made of. As the Veteran's Affairs Minister and the Employment Minister throw around wild accusations that de facto suggest that the leader of Liberal Party is knowingly consorting with Islamic "terrorists," one can really see the dangers of the unhinged cabal that is in control of our government. It is not an unreasonable jump from these actions to outright accusations of foreign influence in next October's elections. Given all that has occurred, it is easy to imagine a Harper regime so driven by their own sense of moral righteousness that they would attempt to avoid or overthrow an election loss through an action of martial law. If you don't believe such a thing is possible just listen carefully to how they speak and watch carefully how they act when the world doesn't conform to their simple black and white view of their own moral rectitude. It is ominous and speaks of deep-seated mental disturbance.

Really? Is that all you've got?

Cathie from Canada - Thu, 08/07/2014 - 22:25
Really, Harper Cons? Is this the best you can do? Is this all you've got?
Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney used his parliamentary email account to circulate a Conservative attack on Liberal leader Justin Trudeau over the Liberal leader’s 2011 visit to a mosque in his Montreal riding....
Neither Kenney nor Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney, nor Veterans Minister Julian Fantino nor, even, the Prime Minister’s Office or its boosters at Sun Media — who all pushed the same allegations — bothered to note that Trudeau’s visit to the Montreal mosque came in the month before the New York Times reported on the mosque’s alleged al-Qaida link.
Nor did they mention that the Defence Department document quoted by the Times was by then four years old, and based on reports of al-Qaida bad guys who wafted through the mosque in the late 1990s, more than a decade before the honourable member for Papineau popped in...
The Liberals maintain that if the Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiah mosque really is a training ground for religious extremists, the minister of public safety should probably be doing something about it, rather than using it to score points on the leader of the third party.Well, I guess the marijuana smears didn't work, and the ads showing Trudeau with his shirt off actually backfired -- no surprise there.
So now we're supposed to be all "oooh, terrorism!"? Ridiculous.

Stephen Harper's Hypocritical and Dangerous Ukraine Adventure

Montreal Simon - Thu, 08/07/2014 - 22:01

Well as you know Stephen Harper has been posing as a Great Warrior Leader ever since the Ukraine crisis began. 

In relentless pursuit of the ethnic vote, he has tried to make it appear like he is leading the charge against the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. 

By blowing enough hot air in his direction the fascist dwarf must have had to put rocks in his pockets to keep from from being blown through the air. 

Or not...
Read more »

Fetus Tunnel Vision and Lying for Baybeez

Dammit Janet - Thu, 08/07/2014 - 13:49
Just because it's so rare to see evidence of intelligence or self-awareness among fetus fetishists, I offer these two links.

Here's an anti-choice "trainer"(whatever that is) who admits that *gasp* not everything is about abortion.

One of my colleagues at Students for Life of America recently asked me for an example of pro-lifers doing things that appear weird to our society. The first thing that came to mind was something that my brother Timothy and I call FTV: “Fetus Tunnel Vision.”

fetus tunnel vision
1. the inability to see and/or acknowledge human rights injustices without equating or comparing them to abortion.He then gives some good reasons to avoid this idiocy.

Not that the majority of them will see the sense in that advice.

Here's a more recent one (July this year) about a fetus fetishist who actually acknowledges *gasp* science and admits that anti-choicers are lying.

The state legislative director of one of the nation’s leading anti-choice organizations recently contradicted a key refrain of the anti-choice movement when she admitted that abortion is safer than many common medical procedures, including delivery.

During a political and legislative strategy session at the National Right to Life Committee’s annual convention held last weekend in Louisville, Kentucky, Mary Spaulding Balch said current data shows that abortions—including riskier second-trimester abortions—carry fewer risks of death than vaginal births, cesarean sections, and plastic surgery procedures, such as facelifts and liposuction.

In making this point, Balch criticized the legislative strategy used by other anti-choice groups to pass bans on abortion after 20 weeks by claiming the procedure is dangerous to women. The proper approach, she said, is to base the argument around the unborn.
It’s no secret that the National Right to Life Committee has always framed anti-choice arguments around saving the unborn, while other advocacy groups in the movement have opted to focus on the woman’s physical and mental health as part of their legal and political strategy. But it is rare for anti-choice leaders to publicly admit that abortion is actually safer than pregnancy or other common medical procedures.
Sadly, it does not mean that the forced birth gang has had a "come to Darwin" moment. But rather, this is just another salvo in the warfare between absolutists (the egg meets sperm = sacred life gang) vs the incrementalists (the lie and cheat and throw up as many barriers as possible to women seeking bodily autonomy gang).

The ultimate goal of both sides is the same -- to outlaw abortion -- but I plan to use that link whenever the "abortion hurts women" meme comes up.

They're lying and they know it and don't give a shit.

There are some quality candidates…

Trashy's World - Thu, 08/07/2014 - 10:10
… vying for Liberal Party nominations. My political junkiness kicks into high gear usually about 12-18 months ahead of a projected election date. I love elections. And I love the processes and machinations leading up to them. Although it has been an unbelievable (literally and figuratively… which you’ll understand if you know me personally) summer, I have […]


Subscribe to aggregator - Posts from our progressive community