Posts Tagged ‘vote’

Congratulations to the UK on voting to leave the EU. Charles de Gaulle did you all a favour in vetoing entry twice, and now the voters overturned what their self-aggrandizing politicians have been doing since the 70s.

Read Full Post »

An excerpt from an email to my Member of Parliament on October 10, 2014, on what every Canadian Member of Parliament should be aware of in lieu of Parliament’s vote to support air strikes against ISIS. Consider passing on this information to your Member of Parliament, and as things escalate according to plan, some may begin to raise questions behind closed doors and consider whether these military interventions are truly in the Canadian national interest.

I wanted to draw your attention to the remarks of former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Gen. Wesley Clark, that indicate these latest events may all be part of a bigger plan being played out by others who have no Canadian national interest, as he appeared on the program Democracy Now! in 2007 (transcript here) and described his meeting with a General at the Pentagon in 2001 after the start of bombing in Afghanistan, and he was told “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.”

The timeline hasn’t held up, but since then, Iraq was invaded in 2003, Sudan was broken up in 2005 with South Sudan proclaiming independence in 2011, Lebanon’s former Prime Minister was assassinated in 2005, the U.S. has been continuing air strikes against Somalia to this day, Libya was taken over in 2011, the U.S. has since officially been providing military support to rebels against Assad in Syria, and Israel has repeatedly been saying that it will not hesitate to respond militarily to Iran’s ongoing nuclear program regardless of the international process through the IAEA.

Read Full Post »

Today is the day for deciding who will become California’s next Treasurer, and monetary reformer and author, Ellen Brown, whom I have interviewed twice, is a candidate in the election.

Vote if you’re in California and still have time!

Read Full Post »

Sandra Day O'ConnorIn her March 5, 2013 appearance on Charlie Rose, she said in reference to her “swing vote” capacity on the Court (at 9:29):

The Court was divided in such a way that a single vote could turn it from an affirm to a reverse.

Except that Justices and judges don’t cast votes — they render legal opinions — that is, unless she’s referring to their effective behaviour these days, in casting political votes on legal cases, such as Bush v. Gore (2000) and Roe v. Wade (1973), which is completely contrary to the U.S. system of separation of powers.

Read Full Post »

English: Ballot Box showing preferential votingI first discovered in 2007 that Canadian citizens who are residents in Ontario can vote for none of the above by declining their ballot. I personally availed myself of that option upon concluding that I couldn’t in all good conscience support the Ontario Green Party as an alternative to the obviously detrimental three major parties: Liberal, Progressive Conservative and NDP.

The Election Act, 1990 words it this way:

Declined ballot

53. An elector who has received a ballot and returns it to the deputy returning officer declining to vote, forfeits the right to vote and the deputy returning officer shall immediately write the word “declined” upon the back of the ballot and preserve it to be returned to the returning officer and shall cause an entry to be made in the poll record that the elector declined to vote. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.6, s. 53.

The wording makes it sound as if you’re throwing away your vote, but in reality, it’s effectively a vote for none of the above.

The importance of the option to decline your ballot is that it clearly shows that the voter is dissatisfied with the available candidates, demonstrating a principled stand, and not being lumped in with those who are simply too lazy to vote, or those who spoil their ballot intentionally or accidentally.

There is no such option at the federal level, despite a 2001 bill (C-319) that would’ve provided Canadian voters with such an opportunity in subsequent elections.

Not only did the Waterloo Region Record omit mention of Libertarian candidate, Allan Dettweiler, it also omitted mention of the option to decline your ballot.

Are they really unaware of this option, or are they deliberately omitting reference to it?

Read Full Post »

P questionThe question you should ask any political candidate seeking your vote, in order to determine whether they’re qualified is:

“What is the purpose of government?”

17 years ago, I would’ve answered that question by saying it’s to maximize the greater good. However, that allows for harm to be done to some, though I had it in mind that it would be minimized to the greatest extent possible.

Today, I answer that question a very different way, and won’t vote for a candidate who would answer it any other way than:

“To protect individual rights.”

If he/she is sincere in his response, you can feel more comfortable that when given power, he is less likely to infringe upon your individual rights with the justification that it is serving the greater good.

As a corollary, the only legitimate infringement upon an individual right is in the course of necessarily protecting other individual rights. An example is when your right to freedom of peaceful association is infringed upon (by detaining you) if you violate the individual rights of others.

A local example I have spoken out on is a Canadian federal agency’s award of $5.8 million for video game research at the University of Waterloo.

The justification has been given that it serves the greater good, but that is small comfort to the security guard I know who was laid off from his $25+ an hour manufacturing job in 2006 and is now only making $11 an hour, or to the person I know who was laid off from a company after they went bankrupt and still owe him over $2000 in pay for services rendered.

While I appreciate the same good intentions of those who justify government action in the interests of what they regard as the greater good, just as I used to, it is indeed a slippery slope, and can lead to a vicious tyranny of the majority, with 50%+1 subjugating the “minority.”

It is so commonplace these days for government to forcibly take the earnings of some in order to redistribute it for the overwhelming benefit of others, but what specifically led me to speak out on this redistribution is the outrageous nature of forcibly taking the hard-earned wages of people I know who can scarcely afford it in order to pay for something as comparatively inconsequential as video game research, which can easily be voluntarily funded solely by the lucrative private sector video game industry and individual private donations.

Read Full Post »

Giant Canadian flag in downtown Vancouver

The B.C. referendum success of voting to scrap the federally administered HST on August 26, 2011, represents a trend of Canadian success stories of reigning in government since 2010.

While liberty has taken a back seat on the mad rush toward more and more government control in people’s lives, Canadians have fought back in three key ways since 2010.

First, on October 26, 2010, with city of Waterloo residents rejecting continued fluoridation of their water, despite the arrogant attempts of some so-called dental professionals in only showing up for one of three scheduled debates on the issue, presenting their arguments on high from their proverbial Mount Olympus.

To me, that vote, along with the rejection of merger talks with neighbouring Kitchener, was tangible evidence of Waterloo finally earning some of its otherwise premature designation as the world’s most intelligent community in 2007.

Then, on February 8, 2011, Calgary city council voted overwhelming to no longer forcibly medicate its residents with fluoride through their municipal water supply, and voted to reject hearing from a so-called panel of experts on the issue, recognizing that such a presentation is unworthy of consideration with regard to a fundamental human right.

In all three cases, liberty won out at the expense of arrogant politicians, so-called experts, and arrogant and over-reaching governments that have become a clear and present danger to the very existence of free Western societies since 9/11.

I hope that these examples will at least serve as an inspiration to those in the U.S. who are seeking to rein in what I view as their arrogant and over-reaching federal government. If the normally sanguine Canadians can push back on their government, then by George, surely Americans can push back on theirs!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »