I told you they needed that built-in scapegoat, for the Blog-o-Matic!

Posted by: Wonder Woman at December 28, 2005 10:28 AM

---

If it was a fraud would the site be taken down so quickly and would Klander Associates site also been gutted?

Posted by: wolfvillewatch at December 28, 2005 10:28 AM

---

Or would Klanders have resigned or benn punted?

Posted by: capt_bob at December 28, 2005 11:00 AM

---

But "Mike Klander" is almost a perfect anagram of "I'm Karl Rove". Wake up and smell the coffee, folks. ;^)

Posted by: andy at December 28, 2005 11:12 AM

---

Klander - it was a story for about 12 hours - only the die-hards on the far right are still talking about it...

Posted by: Flanstein at December 28, 2005 12:58 PM

---

Yeah, far right guys like this:
http://sinisterthoughts.blogspot.com/

Posted by: groovy-on-granville at December 28, 2005 01:03 PM

---

This is the site Charles Adler is referring his readers to for them to get the scoop on KKKlandergate.
http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Adler_Charles/2005/12/28/1370321.html

For those readers, the information you're looking for is here:
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/146868.php#more
in which Angry provides a thorough summary of the Klander Kase. He based it on looking at ALL of Klander's blogs, including those that the mainstream media is ignoring. A link to all the Klander blogs is provided in the the first of the comments section here:
http://dustmybroom.com/?p=2453#comments

When you read the above, ask yourself - if the Conservatives had had a guy this racist, misogynist, homophobic, and crude in their midst, what would the mainstream media have done about it? And then ask yourself whether the Liberals have been allowed to skate on this one.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 02:18 PM

---

Klander - It was a story for about 12 hours.
Liberal denial has swung into action. If he had been a Conservative it would have been a story
right up to Jan 23.

The Liberals really believe that they are superior to all other beings and that the normal
moral values we live by do not apply to them. For they are secular Gods who know that we lesser mortals exist only to appease their ceaseless hunger by voting for them at elections.

However, whatever the result of the election I believe the Liberals no longer have a long term future. They are an empty shell waiting to crumble. And they will.

Posted by: The Fog is Clearing at December 28, 2005 02:20 PM

---

Today's Sheila Copps column and an excerpt!

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Copps_Sheila/2005/12/28/1371104.
The same backroom boys use the race card when it will play well for them. "Trade one Sikh candidate for a Ukrainian as long as it will get votes andkeep them quiet," is a view I have actually heard expressed by a key Martin organizer.

Posted by: George at December 28, 2005 02:29 PM

---

This is a way in which third party groups, constrained but not prevented from participating in the election in a meaningful way, could ensure the defeat of the Liberals. Just print off colour copies of the Sheila Copps article, and send it to every home in Ontario and B.C.

The Libs would be lucky to surpass Kim Campbell's results.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 03:14 PM

---

More from the Sheila Copps article:
Klander, the son of hard-working immgirant steelworker parents in Hamilton, rose to great heights in the Liberal party by working hard to fit in. In the Martin backrooms, fitting in tends to mean "old boy" and bathroom humour, and ensuring your place is secured by tearing others down.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 03:18 PM

---

Still more:
On it, Klander claims he will never run for office because he does not want to be forced to be nice to stupid people. It was not always this way. I remember when, as a young high school student, he came into my office interested in knowing more about the Liberal party. His father was a diehard New Democrat, but Mike thought the Liberal Party might be a more realisitic way to help people. As a young man, he wanted to get involved to make things better. Over the years, it became simply about the win. My last images of Klander involve him working against me (and for the Martin/Tony Valeri side) in the ugly battle over the Liberal nomination in Hamilton East-Stoney Creek last year.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 03:20 PM

---

And more yet. This lady's on fire!
His blog struck me as stunning in its ignorance. No depth there, simply hate. Martin good, everyone else bad. He mocks the facial disfigurements of former PM Jean Chretien, as well as Canada's first elected quadriplegic, Tory MP Steven Fletcher. He refers to one of Canada's first elected Muslim MPs as "ethnic" Rahim Jaffer. He makes what I view as misogynistic and homophobic comments in many entries.

What is even more amazing was the reaction this week by Martin spokesman Stephen Heckbert. He downplayed Klander's comments because they were on a blog: "Partisan blogs get a little heated, especially around election time. You'd see some language that might curl your hair."

If that is the language the Martin Liberals expect to see in print in a pre-election blog, what do they say in private?

I wonder whether it would even occur to the Martin backroom boys that there was anything wrong with the Chow-Chow "separated at birth" posting -- more likely, they would pass it around, smirking at anyone who did not get it.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 03:21 PM

---

And we're back with more of the Sheila Copps expose of Liberal backroom racism, misogyny, and stone age crudeness:

The same backroom boys use the race card when it will play well for them. "Trade one Sikh candidate for a Ukrainian as long as it will get votes andkeep them quiet," is a view I have actually heard expressed by a key Martin organizer.

In today's party machine, non-white voters are viewed as commodities, to be traded for seats which will guarantee a majority. The only difference in the Klander blog is that the public actually found out.

(Liberal backroom personnel, please form a line as we process your EI benefit claims. No pushing. No shoving. No elbowing in the groin. And would someone please see where Mike Klander's protection detail is? I just mopped up from the last beating.)

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 03:27 PM

---

ALBERTA-BC; BC-ALBERTA (Cascadia: It’s Ontario’s call)

Projecting into the future, two or three decades hence, if Ontario blows it again and continues to assume the right to impose its corrupt, arrogant, authoritarian, and undemocratic one party state ‘Liberal’ party onto the West and Quebec by virtue of the fact that the vote is over once the Ontario vote has been counted under our skewed electoral system where ‘majority’ governments often represent only 20% of potential voters, then inevitably a trend line will have been established that will lead to further regional alienations leading to further regional separations. Over time in a setting of continuing political miasma, Canada will divide into the three strong regions capable of forming independent jurisdictions within a global trading network.

Globalism has replaced the need for large geographical nation states. The European Union has shown that nations can maintain a sense of sovereignty and identity, even as they join in a monetary and free trade union. Typical of the desire of the ‘Liberal’ one party state party, the ‘Clarity Act’ seeks to limit the nuances and options possible for redefining relationships in tandem with a modern and changing world so as to protect the authoritarian dominance of the one party state based in Ontario over the different regions in evolving Canada. Governance and relationships need not be declared so simple arbitrarily by a central government so jealous of maintaining its own dominant power.

If Ontario blows it again, and denies regional aspirations by virtue of Ontario’s skewed grip on power over the other regions, Canada will become devolved into increasing regional awareness. Quebec is well on its way towards building the self-confidence and self-identity necessary to leave the Canadian dysfunctional Ottawa ‘Liberal – run nest. Quebec will find its path in a global economy context, and will negotiate on a mutual benefit basis continuing economic relations with Canada and the rest of the world.

Alberta is a land-locked resource-rich jurisdiction with the highest growth rate by far in Canada and supplies the largest sums of ‘transfer payments’ that Ontario’s Ottawa then takes credit for. Ontario can’t help itself, and is itching to form government again so as to impose another NEP version on Alberta so that Ottawa coffers can use this money to increase further Ottawa’s powers at the expense of both the West and Quebec. With a fast growing population of almost three and a half million, Alberta can either look east and accept Ottawa’s covetous attentions and power assumptions, or Alberta can look west towards forming increasing political and jurisdictional bonds with British Columbia.

As a jurisdictional unit in a global context, ‘Alberta-BC;BC-Alberta’ make sense in a global trade context. For shorthand, let’s call a jurisdictional union of Alberta and BC “Cascadia� for present convenience, with no intended long-gone historical reference implied. A central spine of mountains would be at the centre of such a unit, and so ‘Cascadia’ would be a possible moot term to describe this new jurisdiction.

Cascadia would have a present population of seven and a half million, and with projected growth rates, and the boom that would follow casting off the dead-weight of Ottawa mal-governance, limitations, and costs, Cascadia would quickly become a viable jurisdiction of ten million. Compare this to other viable jurisdictions, such as Sweden - 9 million; Austria – 8 million; Finland – 5 million; Switzerland – 7 million; and Portugal – 10 million. All these are jurisdictions with comparable populations, although Cascadia would enjoy a vastly greater amount of geography and resources.

What BC adds to Alberta’s resource wealth is a Pacific window, four million people, and a diverse basket of resource wealth complimentary to what Alberta offers. It is a marriage of equals that would result in the creation of Cascadia.

So what exactly would Cascadia require from Ottawa? A continuation of differential freight rates favouring Ontario as we had in the past? Ontario court decisions thwarting Western human values? Vast taxes collected to serve Liberal party waste and social engineering philosophies?

Cascadia would entail trade relationships dominated by both the Pacific Rim and the US, much as is the case now. The rest of Canada would negotiate Pacific Port access that would end up harbouring little change from the flow of goods through BC as we already engage now. In a global trade environment, not much would change with the establishment of ‘Cascadia’ as its own jurisdiction. Only the political and bureaucratic caste based in Ottawa represented by Canada’s one party state ‘Liberal’ party would have some adjustments to make. Commerce would do just fine.

BC-Alberta (Cascadia) would benefit greatly from shaking off the yoke of Ottawa taxation. Instead, these vast sums could be invoked by Cascadia to serve its own interest and development. There would be no more constitutional debates over Quebec or anything else and a thirty year legacy of Ottawa dysfunction and democratic malfeasance would evaporate with dis-attachment. Almost every Federal governance file operating in Cascadia today is a dismal failure of federal cronyism, waste, incompetence, malfeasance, and arrogant abuse of common sense. Cascadia could run with much more efficiency immigration, fisheries, ports, and everything else in its own interests, rather than the interests of a far-off Ontario-based bureaucracy thwarting the development and security of BC-Alberta at every turn, while sucking so many taxes to do so, and then denying the West basic modern democratic reforms, symbolized by an elected senate.

All these all too obvious benefits of an Alberta-BC (Cascadia) union would only be necessary if Ontario blows it again, and with the same historical arrogance, once again pushes the corrupt Ontario-centered ‘Liberal’ one party state party onto the West and Quebec because of the skewed electoral system that gives Ontario the power to do so.
This Winter election is really up to Ontario. Does Ontario want to vote for the short term of keeping its hegemony over Canada’s regions to serve the myopic self-interest of its federal bureaucracy and ‘Liberal’ officialdom? Or does Ontario want to vote for either of the two parties promising genuine electoral and democratic reform that just might serve to save Canada over the long term? It’s Ontario’s call.

Posted by: edward mills at December 28, 2005 11:37 PM

---