Sunday, November 25, 2007

Scary Secrets

I've got to let you in on some secrets, and they are pretty scary. The political Left have an agenda. And they don't always talk about every aspect of their agenda, so it's a secret hidden agenda. They're not just acting randomly on every political issue (as much as it would look like it). Instead they have an ideology. Understand the scary implications; they are ideologically driven. Many of them have a far Left ideology. And they won't stop until they've pushed this whole country in the direction they want to go. Let's be perfectly clear that they are not just voting on specific issues, but it's all part of their overall plan on where they want to take the country!

Well the above paragraph sounds pretty silly, doesn't it? Of course the Left has an agenda, and of course they are ideologically driven. Most political movements are (except the most pragmatic political parties who will say anything to get elected). So why is it that Liberal Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party can raise these "charges" against the Conservative Party? Of course the Conservative Party of Canada is ideologically driven. The CPC has a core set of beliefs (a.k.a. an ideology) which determines the laws they set forth and the government they provide. It would be stunning if the CPC didn't have an ideology. But the political Left is aided by the media in making the "allegation" that Stephen Harper is scary because he is ideological driven. Of course he's ideologically driven; he's not a Liberal.

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Quote the Bible, Go to Jail

Interesting ruling by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Of course the precedent gets set when someone makes a statement that is over the top, but once the precedent is set...

I love this country, but I don't love everything about this country.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

In Other News...

I took my family out to Dairy Queen for dessert tonight. Dad's always a hero when he makes smart decisions like this.

Best line of the day... "Women can compartmentalize. For example, they can think about both their emotions and their feelings at the same time." I'm not allowed to say who uttered this gem.

Hats off to Sympatico, who cut me over to a new online mail system without telling me, forced me to change my password and then didn't accept it, and then didn't take my spam filters from my old online mail system (thus flooding my inbox with over 100 spam emails when I got home tonight). Superb. Really superb.

Monday, November 19, 2007

More Excuses

I’m almost finished reading “No Excuses”. A couple more stories stand out. They were at a university and wanted to use the computers in a secretaries office to rewrite some of a speech. The secretary wouldn’t let them use the computers for political purposes so they simply locked her out of her office until they were done.

In another incident, John Kerry was talking about how much his Dad meant to him, and how his Dad had bought him his first sailboat. Because they were trying to pray down Kerry’s reputation as an elitist and because most fathers are not in a position to buy a real sailboat for their sons, they simply changed the story so that Kerry was saying his Dad bought him his first baseball mitt.

Towards the end of the book, Shrum has a warning for the Roman Catholic Church. Kerry, a practicing Catholic, was criticized by the Catholic Church for being pro-choice. Shrum warns the church that since the Democratic candidate for President will always be pro-choice, they run the risk of making sure that Catholics cannot ever be the Democratic candidate. I’m not sure if Shrum understands the irony of what he is saying. Because the Democratic Party has made this the litmus test for its candidates, the Catholic Church must remain silent on moral issues. Wow!

Once again we must remind ourselves that political liberals cast themselves as the good guys, fighting against the devious conservatives who will do anything to win (or steal) an election. While conservatives feel that liberals are simply wrong (or perhaps naive), liberals in general feel free to turn up the rhetoric and lambaste conservatives as dangerous, unprincipled, untrustworthy and dishonest. I have the feeling after reading more than 400 pages of “No Excuses” that reality is somewhat different.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Book Review

I'm about two thirds the way through Robert Shrum's "No Excuses - Confessions of a Serial Campaigner". For those who have never heard of him, Shrum is a political consultant and speech writer for the American Democratic Party. As a consultant he is hired to help out with an election campaign. He has worked for most of the major American Democratic candidates, including many who were running for President.

To start, let me say this is an interesting book from a man who is a definite insider. If you want to understand how political campaigns work, "No Excuses" will be part of your education. Shrum is a man of obvious talents, despite the somewhat misnamed "Shrum Curse". But what I've been finding most interesting about this book is its insight to the liberal mindset.

Like most ideologies, liberalism has its own set of assumptions and basic beliefs. For example, it is a matter of canonical truth for American liberalism that George Bush stole the 2000 Presidential Election. Shrum mentions this, together with an ominous reference to the Diebold voting machines being made by a man who was a donor to the Bush campaign. But it's not a thought Shrum needs to develop because every right thinking liberal knows Bush stole the election. There is no need for the thought to be developed because it is a part of the liberal corpus of truth; to be accepted by all the faithful without question.

But maybe the most interesting part of this book is revelation of dirty tricks by the Democratic party. In the liberal mindset, Bush stole the election and Nixon's dirty tricks were inexcusable, but Shrum is able to unashamedly point to numerous dirty tricks by Democratic politicians. If Republicans/conservatives had done the same dirty tricks they'd be pilloried; since the dirty tricks were done by Democrats/liberals they were not only justified but not even requiring explanation or excuse.

For example, when Teddy Kennedy was running against Jimmy Carter for the 1980 Democratic nomination, the Kennedy forces knew a certain area of a certain State would vote heavily for Carter. To prevent this from happening, they phoned radio stations in that area pretending to be from the U.S. National Weather Service, warning people to stay home because tornadoes were expected.

When Teddy Kennedy was in a tight Senate reelection battle, there were concerns that Kennedy would look fat standing in front of a narrow podium during a debate. To get around this, they dressed a couple guys like workmen and sent them over with replacement podiums that were wider, and shipping the offending podiums to the far side of the State were they wouldn't be found.

When Al Gore was running for the Democratic Presidential nomination prior to the 2000 election, they knew a certain area of a state would vote heavily for Gore's challenger. So they sent Gore, the Vice President, into that area of town with the full Vice Presidential motorcade, snarling traffic so that his opponent's supporters couldn't make it out to the polling station.

In another election, Shrum's client wanted to distance himself from Clinton and his character "issues" so they produced ads stating that the opponent had sided with Clinton on hundreds of votes. But as Shrum points out, most of these were procedural votes but they avoided mentioning this in the ads. Procedural votes fall along the lines of "Shall we adjourn for one hour to have some supper?"

Now please understand, I'm not criticizing Robert Shrum. If these are viewed as acceptable activities by all parties, so be it. If liberals and conservatives are allowed to play by the same rules, so be it. But what is unacceptable is the idea that liberals can pull stunts like this, but conservatives can't. I personally would prefer a much more above-board set of rules that define acceptable behaviour, but I thank Robert Shrum for opening my eyes.

In short, if you are interested in how campaigns run and interested in the liberal mindset, read "No Excuses". It's a good read and worth the time. My thanks to Robert Shrum for helping with my education.

Saturday, November 17, 2007

The Untold Story

Here's a story that you won't hear in the main stream media. They're too busy telling you America is losing in Iraq and with general stories of self-loathing.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

They Get It

Our Director of R&D and Director of PLM were in town this week, and I think their visit was a real success. I think the drive and ability of our team was evident to them. We're worked hard and delivered on a lot of good products over the last year. But more importantly these two Directors impressed us. In any organization, you sometimes wonder about the people at the top. But it was quite evident that these two Directors get it. Our Director of R&D really understands what it means to have great teams developing great software. Our Director of PLM understands network management software and customers and competition and where he wants to take our products. I asked my team today in some one-on-one sessions, and they were very impressed.


I was in the local Christian bookstore last Saturday and they had John MacArthur's "Truth War" one shelf away from Joel Osteen's new book, "Become a Better You". I thought this was ironic. But the sad part was that they had about 50 copies of Osteen's book and only one of MacArthur's book. I guess they carry what people are interested in buying, and they aren't interested in buying truth.

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Not a stellar day...

It wasn't a stellar day for the glorious socialist revolution. Juan Carlos is nobody's fool. Saying to Chavez, "Why don't you shut up?" was brilliant... but I suspect it didn't work.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Lots Happening, but Nothing Noteworthy

Lots is happening and I'm very busy, but not much that's noteworthy. I'm preaching twice at Bridlewood tomorrow, in the morning continuing the series on theology and in the evening speaking on Galatians 2:1-10.

I'm just about finished reading "Harper's Team" by Tom Flanagan. Flanagan was one of Stephen Harper's mentors and was for a while his campaign manager. Lots of details on what it takes to run a successful political campaign, from reality checks on press releases to selling memberships to information systems to media buys.

Hannah has a bit of a cold and has been a bear the last couple of nights, and I wasn't feeling well yesterday (though I'm fine today).