I saw the headline, and examined this news article in all seriousness...

But my frakking Gods...
Is sex education failing?
Do people not understand appropriate "lab techniques"?
Is there an impression that, pending absolute evidence to the contrary, condom use is optional?!

http://health.lifestyle.yahoo.ca/channel_section_details.asp?text_id=3741&channel_id=1028&relation_id=30152

READ THAT ARTICLE!!!! (My apologies for not hyperlinking... Don't know how.)

If you are stupid enough to be making ANY of those errors (with a NON PROVEN sexual partner) and (excluding "condom breakage/slippage" which is a (mostly) random occurance)then you truly should NOT be having sex!!!

READ THE CONDOM PACKAGE!!!!!!!!!!
USE COMMON SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And, if you're dumb enough to require this reminder: USE A FUCKING CONDOM!!!!
(Unless (a) you with GOOD reason preferably involving a DEEPLY trusting relationshion believe it is safe to do otherwise or b) it is proven to with reliable, verifiable lab data safe to do otherwise)

Continuing my series of reporting the platforms of the major four parties running in British Columbia during this federal election, I give you the NDP. Keep in mind, that as the election unfolds, each party that I summarize is sure to continue to release platform planks. If any party you read about here piques you're interest, I'd sugget reading the speaches/articles/statements section of that party's website for more up to date information. Without much further adieu, I give you the words of promise by Mr. Layton and his crew:

Jack Layton will be a “Prime Minister who will put you and your family first”

Jack Layton will honor the “Atlantic Accord”

To Protect Canadians from “Hidden Fees” and gouging, the NDP will:
o End hidden fees with laws requiring full disclosure of
charges by banks, cell-phone operators, and other companies.
Including the unfair practice of charging more for cell phone
text messages.
o Ban ATM fees.
o Stop price gouging at the gas pumps.
o Put a cap on interest rates and fees charged by ‘fringe banks’.
o Cap the interest rates on credit cards

The NDP's Environmental policy:
o Builds on the Climate Change Accountability Act, proposed by Layton's
party and adopted by Parliament on June 4, 2008. This bill sets the
target of an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and
provides the enforcement tools needed to do the job.
o Make polluters pay for the real costs of pollution. "We'll do this
through a cap-and-trade system that rewards big polluters who reduce
emissions, and punishes those who don't."
o Helps families make the transition to a sustainable economy with a
$750 million green-collar jobs fund.
o Ensures greener homes and cities with average of almost $1 billion a
year for public transport and an energy efficiency retrofit program.
o Introduces Canada Environment Action Bonds to raise capital for the
plan’s goals.
o Halts new tar sands development until emissions are capped.
o And implements a new energy economy strategy -- to be spelled out in
coming days.

New Democrats will commit an average of $2 billion a year to a new labor program, aiming to directly create 40,000 new manufacturing jobs and thousands of spin-off jobs while protecting many more. They will do so through adherence to a 6 point labor program:
o Stop unproductive, untargeted and fiscally irresponsible corporate
tax cuts, and target investments instead to stimulate innovation
o Invest in low-emission vehicle production
o Train new and displaced workers through a Green Collar Jobs Fund
o Create a Jobs Commissioner to investigate shutdowns
o Develop sector-based industrial strategies
o Stop the export of Canadian jobs overseas through new, manufacturing-
friendly trade policies while adopting a Made-in-Canada procurement
policy for the federal government and its agencies.

The NDP plans to invest money in public transportation, specifically:
- $76.3 million in Hamilton
- $137.9 million in Ottawa Public Transit
(One could argue that this is also economic stimulus. Given his Made-In-Canada policy for government contracts, and that given Manitoba is one of North America’s largest Bus manufacturers… But this is just guessing on my part)

Layton also promised less wait times, and more doctors and nurses in his opening speech. I haven’t found any specific policies on this.

Of special note, as I was going through some of Mr. Layton’s statements, I stumbled across some quote of particular interest. The first of these quotes Mr. Layton gave a few days ago in the riding of Vancouver-Kingsway regarding MP David Emerson. If you recall, Mr. Emerson ran as a liberal during the last election. Soon after he was elected he crossed the floor to join the Conservative Party. The voters tried to oust him for this stark betrayl, but these things aren’t easy. As a gentle reminder to all future politicians who would so dexterously betray their constituents, I would suggest that Emerson should be decapitated and have his head impaled on the flagpole outside of Kingsgate Mall on Kingsway. Mr. Layton was more charitable to the man, and instead says

“Unlike Stephen Harper, I’ll be a Prime Minister who’ll put you and your family first by passing laws that will outlaw floor-crossing,” said Layton. “I’ll ensure that what Mr. Harper and Mr. Emerson did to you - the voters of Vancouver-Kingsway - never happens again, here or to any voter in Canada.”

Another Layton quote is as follows:

“In this election, voting for New Democrats means supporting a vision of hope and optimism. It’s time to elect a Prime Minister who isn’t interested in tearing things down, but building things up.”
Does anyone else see a hint of Obama in that statement? I have no doubt it’s plagiarized or at least meant to echo one of Obama’s speeches. Layton, after all, attended Obama’s official nomination ceremony.

And, lest I forget:
“Choosing change that moves us forward, not backward.”
Does this not remind anyone else of the Simpson’s episode where Bob Dole and Clinton were replaced by alien impersonators? “We need to move forward, not backwards! Up, not down. And forever twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.”

So, again, what do I have to say about the NDP? Well, they certainly seem to be committed to the “workers and their families.” But they typically do so by appealing to the immediate self interest of their targeted demographic; the worker. All of their policies seemed geared to saving money for the “average Joe.” Unfortunately, a lot of his promises seem vauge and potentially deceptive. For example, I really do wonder what exactly he means by “stop price gouging at the gas pumps.”

The NDP also seems to be playing up regional politics, and I’m guessing it’s targeted at their primary support base in central an Eastern Canada. He also seems to be alienating voters in Alberta through suspension of tar sand developments. I doubt he would have formed this policy if he had many supporters in Alberta to begin with.

They form an environmental policy, which seems to be all the rage this election. Again, most of the NDP’s policy is quite vague on this front. Although, I must admit to being titillated by the prospect of this energy economy that he discuses. As far as I’m concerned, helping transition Canada’s economy to one based on the R&D and manufacturing of energy efficient technologies would be a marvelous policy. He'd have to discuss it in more depth before I could consider supporting it, though.

A government motivated shift into Green Economy may even be sufficient for me to consider voting the NDP, despite their fanatical obsession with the short term interests of the worker at little else. Given enough time in power, this approach (sole focus on the worker, and little else) will prove unsustainable. However, any feelings I have for the NDP seem rather pointless… They don’t actually seem to be running a candidate in my riding… So, Mr. Layton, you for one, will not get my vote.

Yes, everyone should have the right to a secret ballot. I, however, am waving my right for the sake of this discussion regarding political parties. I feel, that in my case, my beliefs and knowledge will be challenged, tested and improved through such discussion. I also hope to improve the knowledge base of others through the slightly biased collection of facts presented herein.

So, please, challenge me for the sake of discussion, and be willing to be challenged yourself. We'll both come out of this discussion more knowledgeable people.

Although, I might not wish to speak to you again.
Ever.
:)

After learning how the “big boy” parties of Canada present their policies, I gained a new level of respect and admiration for the Green Party. It takes courage and commitment to your principles to be able to spell out, in advance, all of your policies in writing. Apparently the “big boys” lack both, the exception being the Cretien Liberals in 1993. Before the corruption and cronyism set it.

I’m hoping these last few years have seen it purged. But we’ll see. I’m still skeptical.

So, to learn about one of the more prominent “Big Boys” I went directly to their electronic propaganda dispenser. No, I didn’t mean to say website. I don’t think politicians and political parties have websites. Just iGoodSpeak. According to the wikipedia article I read, most political parties don’t like to write their plans out and make it accessible to the public. They like to mention it in speeches, and to keep platform planks few and far between. I have spent the night raiding the Liberal Website to bring you my interpretation of the Liberal Party platform.

- Money for low income families (through refundable tax benefits).
This includes:
o A (universal) per child per year refundable tax
benefit of $350
o An additional $1225 for families with children under
18
o A low income employment tax benefit of $250

- Tax benefits for seniors and the disabled

- Business tax cuts (corporate tax rate cuts)

- The “Green Shift” Tax plan. The idea is that income and investment taxes will be reduced and that all companies who purchase fossil fuels for consumption will be taxed. This tax will undoubtedly therefore being passed onto consumers through means such as higher electricity and gas bills. Interesting to note is that gas prices for cars will not be affected. The “Green Shift” is the biggest plank in the Liberal platform. It is the one topic upon which they’re harping more than any other. I’ve seen in mentioned in Dion’s speeches as far back as I can dig them up.

- They promise to balance the budget and government spending
- They promise to “preserve jobs” and “invest in the economy” of Canada (and deeply oppose the Conservatives Laissez Fair style capitalism)
- $600 million earmarked for investments in green technology R&D and green capital construction
- Tax credits for environmental R&D
- Financial assistance for those willing to green retrofit their homes
- Future cap and trade program for the green shift

- A theme that keeps recurring in Dion’s speeches is that he “loves Canada” and campaigned tirelessly for the unity vote during the last referendum. Since it’s repeated so often, I thought it should be mentioned

- Afghanistan is not mentioned in any recent speech. However, based on what I’ve read in a 28 February 2008 Parliament Speech, the liberals want to change our role from combat to training, set a firm end date and start to focus on diplomacy and development

- A $1 Billion Advanced Manufacturing Prosperity Fund designed to attract heavy industry and R&D in Canada. To qualify for this a company has to be able to create jobs, support secondary industry and “help make Canada an industry leader”

- $3 Billion reserved for replacement and upgrades of infrastructure (can’t tell if this is just for Quebec or nation wide)

Dear Gods… These speeches all seem to echo each other. I’m beginning to think that I could write a Dion speech in my sleep. Flattery, flattery, compliment, bash Harper, Green Shift, leaders of tomorrow, tax benefits resulting from Green Shift, Bash Harper, compare Harper to Bush, compliment local crowd, campaigned for unity during Quebec referendum, loves Canada, rousing ending. (I suspect that I’ll find the same template type style in the speeches of the other leaders)

So, what do I think? It’s certainly more conventional thinking than the Greens, but that’s to be expected. On the whole, I think some Keynesian spending is just what the economy needs to get it back on track. The liberals certainly provide that with their AMP plan, their infrastructure plan, and the R&D benefits resulting from the Green Shift. They also have some corporate tax cuts which could further encourage businesses. They have one of the leading environmental plans out of all the parties (exception being the Greens). However, I’m still offended by an environmental tax which DOESN’T affect gas prices. People need to learn that a car is a tool with some heavy externalities attached, and not a right or a symbol of independence.

Basically, the Liberals seem to have a reasonable platform and a reasonable set of election promises. But, to tell you the truth, they didn’t offer me much to work with regarding their intent or overall philosophies. Maybe that’s on Dion’s personal site, which requires versions of Flash which can’t be installed on a company laptop. So, who are the liberals beyond these promises? I can not really say. Their main priorities seem to be to Green Shift, Balance Budget, Keynesian Kash infusions and tax cuts. So expect that, in addition to some left over cronyism and corruptions left over from the old gravy train days.

I suspect further research into these parties would have to involve the individual resolutions they’ve attempted to pass as a party. Not to mention the critiques of their opponents.

This could explain why it is that I'm having difficulty tracking down liberal policies... Remember that point I made about if it's not in writting, it's harder to accuse you of breaking promises? While, I'm probably going to have just as much trouble pinning down the other parties. It's easy to be cynical these days...

(Stolen from Wikipedia)

The Red Book, officially titled Creating Opportunity: The Liberal Plan for Canada was the platform of the Liberal Party of Canada in the 1993 federal election. It earned its name from its bright red cover, red being the official colour of the Liberals. It was a 112 page booklet; many thousands of copies of it were printed, and it was widely distributed. There was even talk of trying to mail a copy to each Canadian household, but it was decided this would be too expensive.

It was exceptional in how specific it was; while platforms before and since have contained a few substantive promises and many vague statements of principle, the Red Book laid out a long list of changes that the Liberals would make if brought to power.

It was also rare in Canada to have an entire platform released at once. Generally, a party would release a policy idea, wait for it to gather as much media attention as possible, and then release another. Those ideas had also been released during speeches by the party leader, not printed in unbending prose.

Perhaps most central was that the Liberal Red Book gave costs for each of their promises and summed them. Never before had a party attempted to clearly prove that its promises were fiscally responsible and practical.

It was one of the first "contract with the public" type platforms, an idea used by the United States Republican Party in its 1994 Contract with America and Mike Harris's 1995 Common Sense Revolution in Ontario. Other parties have also started to copy the Red Book, and today every party publishes a large policy platform near the start of the election.

The specificity of the Red Book came back to haunt the Liberals, however, and much of the next few years were spent defending broken promises. The most notable of these was the Goods and Services Tax, which the Liberals had promised to replace but did not. Critics also said that the Liberals had broken their promises to increase the power of individual Members of Parliament and introducing a national childcare program.

The majority of the promises were kept, however. Chrétien famously argued that 78% were honoured, a mark he could live with. Others contest whether some of these promises were kept or not

New Liberal Red Books were published for the 1997 and 2000 elections. These contained far fewer specifics and more generalities. The Liberals were worried about the danger of more broken promises and were also running low on new ideas. By 2000, many pundits felt it would be better named the "Red Pamphlet" due to its brevity.

Anyone know where I can find a copy of it on-line? I searched last night, but couldn't find one. Their website was loaded with generalizations, speaches, insignificant facts about Dion and press releases/ stories all favourable to the liberal party. What they didn't do was put their policies into one document so that I can pick through and see if I actually can agree with what they stand for. It doesn't help that their wikkipedia profile says that they've fluctuated all over the political spectrum over the years.

Maybe they've learned as politicians, that if you don't write down your promises, no one can accuse you of breaking them.

Or perhaps the Greens warned them about me, and what I did to their policy book, so perhaps the liberals have hidden theirs until my attention turns elsewhere.

The world really does revolve around me, in case you haven't noticed.

Thanks to a link sent by the card carrying Green, the Green Party of Canada has been the first of four parties which I have researched. And to be honest, I should have saved this one for last. It is by far the most radical collection of political party policies that anyone could write and still pretend to have a claim to general respectability. I rather suspected that the Greens would have some unique ideas, but I wasn’t prepared for what I read.

Their policy document must have been written by a collection of well respected liberal arts professors, small scale hobby farmers, left wing political activists, luddites, , and down right damned dirty, smelly, hippies who got together at camp. Sang Kum-by-ay. And dropped acid. The policy document was liked eked out, five lines at a time, during the breaks between rolling joints and all out back massage orgies. Let’s face it, if Naomi Klein were to form a political party, patterned in her image, this would be the one. To say that these ideas are progressive is a massive understatement. This is more or less the X commandments written by Moses junior after he stared into the mighty cloud billowing from his bong and said “Dude! I see the path to enlightenment!”

Really, I will start showing them some respect later on in the post, but if you want to understand how unconventional these policies are, then take EVERYTHING I said above at face value.

Some of the highlights that I remember from last night. The Green Party of Canada Resolves to:
- Withdraw Canada from NATO and NORAD
- Phase nuclear energy and fossil fuels out of use
- Remove Nudity from the Criminal Code
- Discontinue factory farms, instead going with organically grown
small scale and family farms.
- Encourage hemp production
- Encourage “natural farming, in nature’s own image”
- Renegotiate or withdraw from GATT and NAFTA (pertaining to food
production)
- Reduce military spending by 50% and distribute money to provinces
- They wish to outlaw surrogate mothers
- Phase out tobacco
- Change the education system from its “current mechanism paradigm to
one based on humanitarian sustainable values”
- Stop assistance to foreign governments in areas of nuclear power,
fossil fuels or mega energy projects
- Withdraw from the WTO (effectively)
- Institute a 4 day work week (32 hours) so “that existing jobs can be
shared with the unemployed”
- Establish the right for all species to exist, and to be granted 1
geographical area free form human influence
- Establish a civilian based national defense program that would train
citizens in unarmed national defense initiative (I thought it sounded
cool too, until I realized that the minds who wrote this document
probably weren’t talking about learning the cool bullet-time
maneuvers and tactics used in the Matrix)
- Reform or Abolish the Senate

So, when I say that this was a radical document written by hippies, know that I do not exaggerate. What they propose in their platforms is a complete and total reworking of our country in a left wing image. Not only that, but it also means acting contrary or even in open defiance to some of the world norms currently established. If the Green party attained, even a minority government in the current political climate, our upstart nation would be quashed by a combination of panicky, self-interested investors and hostile foreign governments.

The thing is, that I actually find myself agreeing with SOME of their policies. They certainly may be radical policies, but frankly, the modern political system could stand to have SOME of this thinking injected into it. We’re too caught up in Freidmanism and self interested greed at this point, and could use a swing to the left. However, the guileless and tactless “shotgun” approach represented by the Greens may actually prove counterproductive to their goals.

The bottom lines is, if I can’t actually find myself getting into one of the other three on my list, then I will make the informed decision to vote Green. Some of this thinking needs to be supported, and some of these ideas need to be developed more thoroughly. A few members in Parliament wouldn’t hurt. I’d like to have a voice given to some of these ideas.

I don’t believe that the right to vote should be given to everyone. I think that because it’s available to everyone, it cheapens it and downplays the responsibility attached. Too many people vote without ever truly making an effort to understand the issues, and send the country into unwise ventures. People who do not bother to inform themselves are often manipulated and swindled by the skilled. They often vote for the bait that a pandering politician threw their wait, without noticing the barbed hook attached. And then there’s worse; the people who don’t feel that voting makes a difference, and shirk their responsibility. It is my belief that the right to vote should only be bequeathed to one who is able to demonstrate an understanding of the parties and the people involved. And those who do not, should not be granted access to something for which they show so little regard.

I’ve made a decision this time to try to live of to the burden and responsibility of citizenship in a democracy during an election. When it comes to political issues, I’m certainly very knowledge, and able to discuss abstract principles, historical basis and current players with reasonable accuracy. However, much of this knowledge is gained through papers, television, radio and internet. Most of it from news type sources. And, after some recent reading I’ve done, I’m beginning to understand that most news available simply panders sensation with very few facts. So, this year, to be worthy of my right to vote, I’m going to read the policy platform of the four major parties available in my riding. If I’ve got time, which I have in abundance at the moment, then I will post my findings to my livejournal page, so that you too may be informed.

And, if I do my job right, you’ll vote for whom I want you to vote. That's deomcracy for you. ;)

Modern media is a rather vexing creation. They provide you with headlines, the two major competing points of view (for balance, I suppose) and some vague quotes to match. The Fifth Estate fails us completely when it comes to providing in depth information on an issue. Consider CERN, if you will. A budding you high energy particle smasher at the dawning of its existance. The press tells you that on one hand, the machine will provide us with scientific fodder for decades to come. They also say that it could create a blackhole which could consume the earth as quickly and as savagely as Cthulu with the munchies. But they say, CERN staff says not to worry. At that's it.

I may be a minority in this matter, but if they tell me that the earth could be destroyed, but probably wont, I REALLY would like to understand the rational by which they go by. This has been depressingly devoid from standard media coverage. And considering that I've worked for 28 consecutive 12 hour days, the idea of not being able to have a vacation before the end of the world has left me a touch disraught. To calm my nerves, I decided to delve deeply on a quest for answers. And decided to go straight to the horses mouth (or, interactive computer) and get them from the smartest man I know, Dr. Stephen Hawking.

Hawking (according to my research) says that the LHC uses too little energy to create a micro black hole and that, there's only about a 1 in 100 chance that it will be able to do so. That sounds rather alarming... A 1 in 100 chance to create a black hole? However, he continues to say that “If the collisions in the LHC produced a micro black hole, and this is unlikely, it would just evaporate away again, producing a characteristic pattern of particles,” Professor Hawking said. “Collisions at these and greater energies occur millions of times a day in the Earth’s atmosphere, and nothing terrible happens.”

How does he know this? A) he's smarter than both you and I put together (in his case, 1 head IS better than our 2), and B) the predictions of micro-black holes forming are actually derrived from his research. If they do form, he's probably up for a Nobel.

And, on a further note, from the same source... And I post this because it, in many ways reflects my own views.

Hawking said that trying to choose between the importance of exploring space and running the LHC would be “like asking which of my children I would choose to sacrifice". “Both the LHC and the space programme are vital if the human race is not to stultify and eventually die out. Together, they cost less than one tenth of a per cent of world GDP. If the human race cannot afford that, it doesn’t deserve the epithet ‘human’.”

One minute I'm busy trying to quantify the effects of Palin's entry into the Presidential election as Vice President, and the next thing I find out is that we're in the middle of an election ourselves. One which started after the Americans and yet, will finish before. I think that speaks to our speed and efficiency as a nation, and I'm sure that, when it comes to matters of the bed chamber, Canadians are the ones who start sooner and finish last, and Americans are the sort who "if you blink, you'll miss it." (Yes, 4 weeks in a mine and I've got sex on the brain. Don't be surprised.) It occurs to me that, since i'm dating an American and all, I may really wish to tone down the yank bashing, especially in matters of the bed chamber... But, I digress. I'm breaking for comical amusement, and I haven't even laid (mmm... laid...) my thesis upon the table (mmm... kinky...).

How should I best use my vote in this election?

Thanks to Naomi Klein's shock doctrine, I will be doing a great deal to research the economic and foreign policies of the candidates I choose to support. Ideally, I'm hoping to find a party which has less interest in privatization of the Canadian government, and strikes a good balance between worker and big business.

NDP - This sounds like the propaganda that is spouted concerning the NDP. However, voting for the NDP raises some major issues for me. First of all, although they may (or may not; I haven't done my research) have the economic politics I'm interested in, they do not share my regional politics. As in, they typically support ideas which are bennifical to the Maritimers and those in central Ontario. And, secondly, the candidate that they ran in my riding during the last by-election was younger than I am, had a poltical resume that looked more fit as an application for arts grad school or Starbucks and lives with room mates. This may sound shallow I can't bring myself to vote for a federal politician who has room mates, I just can't.

Who does that leave?

Liberals - How about the Liberals. They've always been Canada's favorite, simply because they're that central party. Not to left, not to right, they've been perfect. So much so that I was once a card carrying member, and recieved Christmas cards from Paul Martin. Unfortunately, I can not support them at this time. Cretien left the party with the infected wound of his cronyism, and they still haven't squeezed the last vestiges of corruption out. Dion still has to prove himself as a leader, something that he still hadn't done in my mind. Or maybe he has, he's just focusing his attention in Central Canada. I suppose that's another problem with liberals, their regional politics suck. Speaking of sucky regional poltics how about...

Bloc Quebecois - C'est un idee que est vraiment merde. Tabernac! Chalaise!

Conservatives - Well, since their support was typically been drawn from the West, and they haven't forgotten their friends yet, I have to admit, that their regional politics agree with me. However. The conservatives are the champions of the type of privitization venture, americanization (sorry Caitlin) socially conservative types that I don't want in power. I have to admit, I've been pleased with their performance as a minority government, but know that voting for them will probably lead to a majority government. All the checks and balances, and their slow seductions of the populace through popular policies will be removed. Furthermore, I'm a bit disappointed by the fact that they've been pandering to Canadians through their attacks on Dion. You know the ones, the radio adds concerning the "Dion tax trick". As soon as they started running those adds, you knew there had to be an election just around the corner.

Where does that leave me?

Green Party? Can't think of a big party to vote for, so I may as well throw the little one a bone? And that's merely because I don't want to take responsibility for directly electing a monster. They perhaps need support to establish themselves, however, I find their economic policy is out to lunch, they make to much of an effort to capitilize of the term "Green" and they have a terrible lack of parliamentary experiance (yes, yes, catch 22) At least there's no regional politics to contend with.

So, I wish to solicite electoral advice. Who should I vote for and why? Better yet, do you have any links to policy websites? I would research them myself, but internet speed is est merde, and I often get frustrated trying.