Author: Evil Scientist

Back here I opined about the fact that Danielle Smith was basically done as Wildrose Party Leader. I figured that there would be a leadership review, the far right of her party would revolt and demand a far right leader and Smith would end up riding off into the sunset. Well things happened much faster than I thought and despite no leadership review it would seem that Smith and 8 of her fellow Wildrose MLA’s will head their own party off at the pass and head on over to the government benches.

This is a bit unprecedented as I can’t recall any party leader crossing the floor while their party still exists. It’s a little unexpected as I had thought that the party may turf Smith and elect a new leader. This turn of events leaves a lot of questions. What will happen to the Wildrose Party? What of the floor crossing members? What does this mean for the Progressive Conservative Pary? What does it mean for Alberta?

I’ll look at the Wildrose Party first. Now one of the reasons Smith may have decided to cross the floor is the WRP’s recent denouncing of their own inclusionary policy. This hard right social conservatism probably doesn’t sit well with Smith’s own libertarian philosophy and her leadership must have been an uneasy one. In fact Smith was probably choses as leader to put a more centrist face on the party’s social policy. Given many of the comment’s I’ve heard from WRP supporters on the radio as well as on line comments from various news sources would suggest that the base was never too keen on being an inclusionary party, I think this doesn’t bode well for the party in the future. With a social “moderate” at the helm, the WRP was on the verge of electoral success during the last election – that is until two events. First an Edmonton area WRP candidate was found to have a web page stating that homosexuals were doomed to roast in a lake of fire. This was followed shortly by a Calgary WRP candidate basically stating that people should vote for him because he was white.

As an aside I live in a rather culturally diverse section of Calgary. The WRP signs that were popping up like weeds in my community virtually vanished the day after the vote for him because he’s white comment

This basically puts the hard-right social and theological conservatives at the helm of the WRP at this point. From what I glean from the comment sections of newspapers, as well as social media, this is a good thing from the average WRP supporter’s point of view as “real conservatives” are now in charge of the party which will win them the next election. Except it won’t. Now I suppose that most of the hard-right conservatives of this province tend to hang out with other hard-right conservatives (given their disdain for pretty much any other political point of view, I find it hard to believe that they would maintain many friendships with people who hold differing views very long) which would tend to colour their views to the point where they think that pretty much every Albertan thinks the same way. They are wrong of course. The fact that Calgary, likely the most conservative (and Conservative) city in the country continues to elect a non-white, Muslim mayor is evidence that most Albertans are actually socially progressive, or at the least not socially conservative. So with the departure of the more socially centrist MLAs and members from the party (there were a few high profile members departing after the repudiation of the inclusion proposal) this leaves the hard right in charge of the WRP. This will make the party again unpalatable to the general electorate of the province. This is not a recipe for electoral success, but it is one for electoral disaster. If the WRP adopts a hard right socially conservative Tea-party-esque agenda they may hold on to a few rural seats in the southern Bible belt part of Alberta, but it would cost the WRP any chance of winning a seat in the cities.

So unless the remaining adults in the WRP can take control, the party is doomed to become a rump hard-right Tea party that will be relegated to the political wilderness. Not that this would be a bad thing.

So what is to become of the floor crossing members? The WRP supporters on line are livid of course, claiming that they’re all “traitors” and that they’re just doing it for the money and pension (which is exactly the same as the money and pension as opposition members get). Given the example of Rob Anderson who initially crossed the floor to the WRP, then won the subsequent election (despite big “TRAITOR” signs along the highway in Airdrie, what’s it with conservatives thinking everyone’s a traitor?) I suspect for most of the floor crossers there will be little in terms of consequences beyond the general fortunes of the Progressive Conservative party itself. Smith herself may pay a higher political price at the polls as former leader, but even then that may not happen depending on who is running against her.

What does this mean for the Progressive Conservative party? Not much other than a near total victory over the WRP. Though there are now 9 more farther right conservatives in the party caucus, the party itself is still mostly centre-right and will unlikely take a hard right turn anytime soon. Prentice is no red Tory, but he’s still a centre right conservative. So baring any major fumbles by Prentice in the next year or so, the PC party will enjoy another cakewalk through the next election back into government. It may not have the 72 seats it now has, but a comfortable majority is still theirs if they avoid any stumbles.

So what of Alberta? The weakening of an already weak opposition is not the best thing that could happen, but it is for the most part the norm in Alberta. Things will likely continue as they pretty much have for the past 40 years, generally mediocre government that’s made to look good because oil and the money it brings gushes from the ground and the boom and bust that comes with it. Beyond that don’t expect a lot to change between now and the next election.

Back here I opined about the fact that Danielle Smith was basically done as Wildrose Party Leader. I figured that there would be a leadership review, the far right of her party would revolt and demand a far right leader and Smith would end up riding off into the sunset.

At this point it’s probably safe to say serial libeller Ezra Levant has been ordered to pay $80000 to a lawyer Ezra called “illiberal Islamic fascist”. Now this wasn’t Ezra’s first time in front of a judge for libel, as he was ordered to pay $57000 in another libel case

At this point it’s probably safe to say serial libeller Ezra Levant has been ordered to pay $80000 to a lawyer Ezra called “illiberal Islamic fascist”. Now this wasn’t Ezra’s first time in front of a judge for libel, as he was ordered to pay $57000 in another libel case he lost.

The fact that Ezra is a lawyer begs the question of how good of a lawyer is he? After all one would think that any lawyer who was able to pass the bar would be knowledgeable about what statements would be constituted as libel. In fact Levant has sued others for libel in the past so you’d think he have some knowledge on the subject. Apparently not.

Perhaps the most damning comment from the judge in the most recent case is:
I find that [Mr. Levant’s] dominant motive in these blog posts was ill will, and that his repeated failure to take even basic steps to check his facts showed a reckless disregard for the truth.
In simple terms the judge in the recent case has called him a liar. Of course those of us who’ve known Ezra since university have known this. The problem Ezra has now is that he’s now in the real world and not the hallowed halls of academe where he could get away with bald face lies. Of course since Ezra was in university during the early ‘90s, he had the benefit that it was hard to fact check him. Nowadays it’s possible to check up on him instantly. Ezra seems to either forget this or ignore this. The issue now is that he’s not protected by the broad based concept of academic freedom, but now must bear responsibility for his actions and lies.

So with two libel losses (and settlements in other cases), Ezra is a one man cottage industry for libel lawyers. In the end Ezra doesn’t want to pay for the consequences of his actions. To wit he has a web page set up so you can give him money to a) help pay for an appeal and b) in failing the appeal, pay the judgment against him for him. Given that his supporters are gullible enough to believe someone who has be shown to be a bald faced liar, they are also likely gullible enough to fork over their cash so that poor, persecuted Ezra can pay the legal bills he’s racked up due to his own inability to tell the truth.

At this point it makes me wonder about those people still gullible enough to believe anything Ezra says. Are they really that out of touch from reality?

At this point it’s probably safe to say serial libeller Ezra Levant has been ordered to pay $80000 to a lawyer Ezra called “illiberal Islamic fascist”. Now this wasn’t Ezra’s first time in front of a judge for libel, as he was ordered to pay $57000 in another libel case

She’s done… With two more of her legislative caucus leaving, this is only the latest hit to the Wildrose party under her leadership in recent months. To recap, it all started back at the end of October when the Wildrose Party failed to pick up even one seat in four

She’s done… With two more of her legislative caucus leaving, this is only the latest hit to the Wildrose party under her leadership in recent months
.

To recap, it all started back at the end of October when the Wildrose Party failed to pick up even one seat in four provincial by-elections, coming in third in one of the Calgary ridings. This was followed by loss of one of the parties MLAs when he left the party to sit as an independent. Next was the parties policy convention where the enshrinement of LGBT rights which had been mentioned in previous policy statements were retracted, despite the support of Smith and her caucus for the retention of the policy. This caused the rather public resignation of a riding vice-president. Finally we have two additional Wildrose MLAs leaving the caucus, this time to sit as Progressive Conservatives.

One has to wonder at this time how much longer the membership will support Smith. She avoided a leadership review at the policy convention which given events since the convention was probably a good thing for Smith personally. Her party’s fortunes with her at the helm however may be another thing. Smith was elected as leader because she gave a veneer of moderation to a party perceived to be full of hard-line social conservatives, which even in Alberta would have a difficult time winning seats. With the results of the policy convention it would seem that the membership is tiring of moderation (such as Smith is a moderate) and Smith is unable to convince them otherwise. When this starts happening, how long can she maintain the confidence of those she leads? How long until she takes a walk in the snow?

She’s done… With two more of her legislative caucus leaving, this is only the latest hit to the Wildrose party under her leadership in recent months. To recap, it all started back at the end of October when the Wildrose Party failed to pick up even one seat in four

Darling of the Canadian right wing, Ezra Levant, has sunk to an even new low. In Ontario a school board has responded to the legitimate concerns for the safety of their children at public Remembrance Day events, has reasonably allowed those parents to send their children to closed activities at

Darling of the Canadian right wing, Ezra Levant, has sunk to an even new low. In Ontario a school board has responded to the legitimate concerns for the safety of their children at public Remembrance Day events, has reasonably allowed those parents to send their children to closed activities at the children’s schools. That this was to happen to accommodate those concerns is outlined in a letter from the school board.

Of course this hasn’t stopped Ezra, master of the false outrage and the made up – well – everything from writing a bizarre islamophobic screed for Sun Media. Now to be clear, the reason for children being allowed to not go to the public ceremonies is because in light of recent events at the National War Memorial in Ottawa, some parents are a little leery of having their kids being somewhere where some radicalized nutbar could open up on the crowd. But that’s not Ezra’s take on it. Like the old uncle at a family reunion that everyone’s uncomfortable around, Ezra goes off blaming Muslim immigrants for the “outrage”.

So now not only do we have Ezra going off on an irrelevant tangent spewing racist screed, but he also wants to force parents to put their children into a situation where there is a small but real risk of life threatening danger. In simpler terms, in order to score some ego points with his fanboi base, Ezra is willing to:

1. Lie about what a school board is doing
2. Lie about why that school board is doing it
3. Lie about a particular religion
4. Be willing to force parents to put their kids in what is perceived to be harm’s way
5. Use an event meant to honour those who have fallen for his own petty racist views.

Of course this has been Ezra’s MO since I first encountered him while we were both at the University of Calgary. The problem for Ezra is that it’s no longer the late 1980s/early 1990s, but 2014. People can fact check Ezra and more often than not, the fact checking shows Ezra for what his is, a liar extraordinaire and more often than not a serial libeller.

Of course his fanboi audience who follow him in Sun media will not bother to fact check him as his often racist and libellous screeds fits their world view, providing much in the way of confirmation bias. This is the truly scary aspect of Ezra’s lies, that there are so many willing and wanting to believe them. Think of it, if you know someone who think’s Ezra’s the bomb, is this what that person truly believes? What do they think of you if that’s the case?

So I would encourage all of you to avoid Sun media as they seem willing to promote Ezra’s lying, meaning at least tacit agreement with him on these matters. If they think Ezra’s lies aren’t an issue, how much else of what they print is lies?

So the votes are in for the four Alberta provincial by-elections and the winners are, surprise, surprise, the Progressive Conservatives. This can only be seen as a big win for Jim Prentice who’s unenviable task is to give the impression of clearing out over 40 years of Tory entitlement. Though not winners, the Alberta party and NDP who came in a strong second in two of the ridings so at the least weren’t losers either. The big losers, the Alberta Liberal party and the Wildrose Party.

For Jim Prentice and the Progressive Conservative Party these by-elections were do or die. All but one had as the PC candidate a cabinet minister or Prentice himself. The rejection of these three candidates would have been a powerful message that the tide had turned against the PC’s once and for all. Holding these seats gives Prentice if not a mandate, at least legitimacy that he would otherwise not have. The question still remains of exactly what Prentice will do with this other than the rapid program of de-Redfordization that he has been implementing. Time will tell how truly different the Alberta Tories will be under Prentice and it remains to be seen if he can fully revive the fortunes of the Progressive Conservative parties in time for the next general election.

For all the opposition parties this was not a good thing in that by-elections are usually a time when the voter can safely send a message to a governing party without the fear of that party being thrown out of office. This didn’t happen and the opposition parties will have to analyze their strategies and prospects for the next election good and hard.

For the Alberta Party and the NDP strong second place showings made this set of by-elections basically neutral. Though not victories, the second place finishes showed the potential for growth for these two parties in Calgary for the Alberta Party and Edmonton for the NDP. Though not a lot to hold a huge celebration about, not a bad showing and something to build on.

The election was a almost a complete wash for the Alberta Liberal party. A string of third and fourth place finishes don’t bode well for future election prospects, though they may still have a chance for growth in Edmonton.

This leaves us with the Wildrose Party. They accomplished a strong second place finish in Calgary-West thanks mostly to a big-name candidate in the person of Sheila Taylor, but failed to duplicate this in any of the other three ridings. In fact in two ridings the WRP finished third behind the Alberta Party and the NDP. This inability of the WRP to deliver in the only poll that counts must be weighing heavy on the people who back the party. It will be interesting to see if, after a second bout of being so close to taking out PC candidates and coming up short (really short in two of the ridings) if the bloom is off Danielle Smith’s rose. Now Smith has called for a review of her own leadership no doubt in an attempt to get ahead of any calls for such a thing from the membership. What remains to be seen is if the WRP membership is willing to have her as the leader for a third kick at the electoral can.

Now other parties have kept leaders despite poor showings a the polls, but most of these parties never expected to take the election as a whole. Things are different for the WRP and Smith. In the case of the last general election, the WRP under Smith was set to take over from the hapless PC’s up until the actual election. Smith’s mishandling of some candidate outbursts was likely a factor in much of the Liberal vote suddenly shifting to the PC party at the last moment in fear that the rest of Smith’s candidates were just better at keeping their mouths shut.

This time around Smith faced a PC party racked by spending scandals under the leadership of Allison Redford. This had given the WRP a boost in the polls, enough to put them in government territory. So with an angry electorate apparently ripe for the plucking, how did Smith manage to not pick up even one seat?

Some of this is partly due to the fact that Jim Prentice is a far more able politician than Danielle Smith. In this case Smith’s days could be numbered as her party looks for someone who can take on Prentice in the next general election. There may be a faction of her party that sees this and will be wanting a change. The question is how big is this group? Hard right conservatives tend to stick to their parties and leaders with near religious tenacity. If the WRP membership is made up of more of the hard right and less of the more pragmatic right, Smith is safe. They’ll stick with her till she wants to leave. If the pragmatic right is more numerous in the party then there may be a leadership change in the party sooner than later.