The Liberal Party of Canada Doesn’t Know It’s Dead

A party seriously considering hiring a boy as its policy chief – is a party no more. RIP Sir Laurier, hopefully you’ll be able to stop rolling soon.

Globe: Meet the 20-year-old aiming to be the next Liberal policy chief


Leave a comment

Filed under The Sinking Ship Liberal

Written for “A Warning From Canada for the GOP”

Inspired by the Republican Party primary process, the regime of Barack Obama, and the words of Sarah Palin, here is my latest piece written for, which you will find here at its original location: “A Warning From Canada for the GOP”. Listen every weekday at 1pm Eastern to two hours of uninterupted independent conservative unruliness, streaming here at Talk Stream Live.

UPDATE: Click here to listen to Tammy Bruce discuss this column on her nightly podcast (5:45 clip).

A Guest Post by Canadian TAM Flaggman

There’s been a lot of hand-wringing these past few days among Palinistas over the former V-P candidate’s apparent defense of Donald Trump’s machinations and Ron Paul’s fanatical followers. These two positions are clearly harmful to the Republican Party, which makes it clear to me: Sarah Palin sees the GOP itself as the problem, not the solution, in this election cycle. When she warns the GOP against isolating Trump and the Paulites, she’s not endorsing a Trump independent run or a Paul presidency per se. What she is doing is firing a shot across the bow on behalf of the Tea Party, saying to the establishment: don’t you dare go dismissing constituency groups within the Republican Party. If it’s Trump and Paul now, it’s the Tea Party next, and that is simply not acceptable. This gives us pause to reflect on a little Canadian political history to see what can happen when the grassroots of a what is supposed to be a conservative party are ignored, humiliated, and isolated.

The 1970s and early 1980s in Canada were run, essentially, by Barack Obama, in the person of the America-hating incompetent-socialist demagogue leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Pierre Elliott Trudeau. When he finally got tired and walked away in 1984, he left the country pining for a conservative renaissance, and Brian Mulroney rode that sentiment to leadership victory in the Progressive Conservative Party, and a landslide in the polls later that year. Despite running as a conservative warrior, Mulroney was the ultimate insider, foisted on the party membership from the Toronto-Montreal legal establishment, and rather than peeling back the Trudeau experiment, he expanded upon it by further nationalizing the health care system, adding a 7% tax-on-everything, and leaving us with crushing deficits that led Canada to the edge of credit rating downgrade. In the 1993 election, with the Conservative-in-name-only Mulroney abandoning ship, and the socialist Liberal Party running on a platform to the right of the Progressive Conservatives, the results came in: the PC Party, the purported conservative side of what was essentially a two-party system, was destroyed. It held on to just two seats in Parliament, and never recovered. Stephen Harper’s Conservative government in Canada today is a result of the gutting and scuttling of that party by small-c conservatives in the ensuing years, forming it eventually into today’s ruling Conservative Party of Canada.

How does this relate to Palin’s comments on Trump and Paul? The key is what happened from 1984, when our McCain-Romney figure (Mulroney) took over, until 1993, when his party essentially disappeared. On two fronts, Mulroney ignored his base. In Quebec, Canada’s second-largest province, the big-government federalist encroachment so enraged the French-majority voters that they left to start their own separatist party that nearly ripped the country apart via referendum in 1995. In Alberta, Canada’s energy-producing behemoth, the big-government encroachment so enraged the rugged individualists of the West that they founded a new party, the Reform Party of Canada, which was essentially our Tea Party movement of the 1990s. (Not coincidentally, Stephen Harper was a founding member of the Reform Party after abandoning Mulroney’s PC’s.)

The splintering of the PC party, a direct result of the establishment placing a higher priority on centralizing federal power than on promoting the will of the grassroots, led to 13 years of corrupt and aimless Liberal Party rule, while the grassroots worked tirelessly to organize and establish itself as a viable national alternative under Harper. But now that a principled conservative party is in charge (not that it doesn’t have its share of RINOs, but that’s for another day), we have a principled government in Canada that, with the majority mandate earned in the 2011 election, is finally beginning to peel back the layers of federalist socialist intrusion into the lives of Canadian citizens.

So don’t dismiss Palin’s apparent defense of Trump and Paul-bots as nonsensical rantings or bitterness. The splintering of the Republican voting base could open up the danger of another decade in the wilderness, and Palin knows this. It’s not so much the loss of Trump-ites (of which there are few) or Paulites (of which there are a few more) she is concerned about. It’s the attitude of dismissiveness by the establishment that could ultimately result in the loss of the Tea Party constituency – and that would be a disaster for the Republicans. And the implication is this: if the Republican establishment tries to force an American Brian Mulroney on the grassroots, the Republican party will be be no more. And the rebuilding under a different name could begin at any time.

-Neil Flagg is a Toronto-based businessman, blogger, Conservative Party of Canada member, and TAM. You can follow him on Twitter @NeilFlagg

Leave a comment

Filed under Conservatism in Everyday Practice, Governor Sarah Palin, Obama Nation, Soulless Conservatism

Ontario’s Public Sector Union, Sponsored by the NDP

If the Public Sector Unions are “for the Middle Class” or “Working Families”, then why do they promote the socialist party at election time? Here’s the OPSEU (Ontario Public Service Employee Union) Head Office 100 Lesmill Rd. North York, ON M3B 3P8 on 9/12/2011, proudly displaying NDP election signs.

NDP Election Signs at OPSEU Headquarters - 1

NDP Election Signs at OPSEU Headquarters - #1

Here’s the people’s candidate, Dr. Bob Hilliard!

NDP Election Signs at OPSEU Headquarters - 2

NDP Election Signs at OPSEU Headquarters - #2



1 Comment

Filed under Ontario Politics

A Glimpse Into the Future

The Fundamental Restoration has begun…2012 is going to be fun.

Rep. Lt.-Col. Allen West & Governor Sarah Palin at Rolling Thunder, DC, 5-29-2011
Rep. Lt.-Col. Allen West & Governor Sarah Palin at Rolling Thunder, DC, 5-29-2011

(From the Rolling Thunder photo gallery at )


Leave a comment

Filed under American Restoration, Governor Sarah Palin

Tim Pawlenty 2007: Listen to Visionaries like Jimmy Carter, ignore Global Warming Skeptics

I started this blog in February 2007, and many of my initial posts centered around the mountains of evidence emerging that the whole Global Warming/Climate Change movement was a complete fraud. In fact, the talk of March 2007 around the ‘net was UK Channel 4’s “The Great Global Warming Swindle” documentary, which exposed the faulty science behind the political watermelon movement. There was an attempt in 2006 to start a “Crunchy Con” movement, but that was a non-starter that fooled no one.

Fast-forward to May 2011, and we have a character named Tim Pawlenty, pretending to be the small-c conservative standard bearer for the Republicans in the 2012 Presidential Election campaign. Yet where was he in April 2007, when we already knew that the Global Warming emperor had no clothes? He was addressing the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group (MCCAG) in Minneapolis, with this brief speech. Here is the full text of his remarks to the organization, found also in the .pdf minutes of the MCCAG found here.

Thank you everyone. You’re all busy and you’ve taken time to help us form a better environmental program for the state.

As Peter Drucker taught us, “The practices that got us here, won’t get us to the future. The best way to think about future is to go out and invent it.”

It looks like we should have listened to President Carter. He called us to action, and we should have listened. So we now have ourselves in a bit of a pickle. As is often the case, the people are way ahead of the politicians. We’re benefiting from their tailwind.

Other visionaries deserve credit too, many who may have been dismissed as goofy. They were right, not goofy. Energy and climate issues are intertwined. Climate change is real. Human behavior is partly and may be a lot responsible. Those who don’t think so are simply not right. We should not spend time on voices that say it’s not real. Please don’t let these voices discourage or distract you from your mission.

Our hope is at the end of your deliberations, you will have given us a plan for action. I’m proud of Minnesota’s longstanding attention to environmental issues, but here we need to raise the bar as others catch up. We want to be bold, dynamic. But we have to fashion steps. Our actions on climate can’t unravel the political consensus or the Minnesota economy. It must be done in a rational way.

Sometimes success has led to complacency. Sadly we have been complacent in thinking about energy and environment. But we’re reaching a tipping point, and we have to deal with it now. I’ll do my best to lead and advocate for your recommendations.

In summary: ‘Jimmy Carter’s malaise speech was right-on. Listen to the visionaries like him and Al Gore, and ignore those deniers who stand in the way of  big-government solutions to climate change. I believe the climate is at a tipping-point, and I’ll act as governor to do whatever you zealots recommend.’

T-Paw has tried to distance himself from enviro-pimping ways of the past. But his “mistake” wasn’t in, say, 1997, when he could have claimed to not have known any better. This was 2007, when the debunking was publicly available, and the red agenda of the green movement was well known. He was already Governor of a state, and was actively encouraging the greens to provide him a plan to implement! Later in 2007, he actually signed a state bill requiring a Minnesota task force to come up with recommendations on how to implement a cap-and-trade system. There’s no way to write this one off as a youthful indiscretion.

So the question is: Is Tim Pawlenty a naive fool, or another two-faced RINO? Either way: I cannot take his candidacy seriously. If you were pushing that stuff just four years ago, you have no business pretending to be a conservative.

Leave a comment

Filed under Over-Environmentalism, Political Idiocy, Politicians, Uncategorized

Two Questions an Atheist Can Never Answer

1) How did the universe begin?

2) How did homo sapiens gain self-awareness?

With love,



Filed under Words of Wisdom

Canada’s Death Panels In Action: Nationalized Health Care Exposed

When Sarah Palin used rhetorical flourish to warn Americans of “Obama’s Death Panel” back in August of 2009, she was mocked and derided by liberals, and sniped at by jealous establishment conservatives. Well, fast-forward to March 2011 in Canada – land of Obama’s dream of nationalized health care – and the debate over the use of the drug Herceptin in the treatment of breast cancer in young women. When 34-year-old mother of two Jill Anzarut went to the press and Facebook to advocate for the drug, which is being denied to her by the Ontario Ministry of Health, our (Liberal) Health Minister chose to respond with jaw-dropping honesty:

“We cannot have a health system where the stories that land on the front page of the paper determine our health-care policy. It would be unfair to those who do not get their stories on the front page if we were to give priority to those who do.”

With these 49 words, Deb Matthews exposes what Palin was so presciently warning about: that nationalized health care ends up becoming about turf-protection, central control, dehumanization of individuals, and a monopoly on health service rationing to a clique of “masters of the universe” who end up thinking their number-crunching degrees in epidemiology give them moral license to determine who deserves to live and die.

Not convinced? Want to give Matthews benefit of the doubt, or deny the truth of what she said? OK, don’t take her word for it. Let’s go straight to the words of Diane McArthur, Assistant Deputy Minister and executive officer, Ontario Public Drug Programs, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, as published in her own words as a letter to the editor in today’s National Post:

“I would like to clarify the Ontario Public Drug Program review process in response to Matt Gurney’s recent article. The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care’s process for evaluating new and expensive cancer drugs is based on the best scientific evidence. The Ontario Public Drug Program relies on a thorough assessment of scientific data and clinical evidence by its expert advisory committee, the Committee to Evaluate Drugs (CED) and the CED/Cancer Care Ontario sub-committee, which includes cancer experts, to develop funding recommendations for all cancer drugs.
As a result, the Ontario Public Drug program is one of the most generous drug benefit programs in Canada.
Ontario’s Compassionate Access Program component of the Exceptional Access Program provides an opportunity for me, as the executive officer of the Ontario Public Drug Program, to consider requests for drugs or indications where the Committee to Evaluate Drugs has not reviewed a drug or where there are rare clinical circumstances in immediately life-, limb-or organ-threatening conditions. This program is not a mechanism to provide an exemption from the evidencebased criteria. The Exceptional Access Program Compassionate Review Policy is available on the Ministry’s website.
The ministry will continue to make funding decisions on drug products based on the advice of experts. We regularly review our criteria as new evidence is brought forward and/or standards of practice change. It is our responsibility to ensure that in addition to providing the best coverage we can, all funding decisions are made on the best available clinical and scientific evidence.”

Trying to put a positive spin on the government monopoly on drug rationing, MacArthur confirms what Palin, and the Health Minister herself, made clear:

1) Initial decisions on drug coverage are made by an “expert advisory committee”. 

2) Ontario’s committee is a smiley-happy-face-committee that is most generous to the little peoples!!!

3) If you’re not satisfied that Ontario’s committee is smiley and happy and generous to the little peoples, you can apply to another smiley happy committee – the committee of ME!!! DIANE MACARTHUR!!! BEARER OF GOVERNMENT GIFTS!!! And my SUPERPOWERS as head of the EXCEPTIONAL ACCESS PROGRAM!!!!

4) But if I, DIANE MARCARTHUR, BEARER OF GOVERNMENT GIFTS decide to quell the PR nightmare my administration is experiencing by granting you, suffering nameless victim who doesn’t fit into the expert panel’s number-crunching criteria yet insists on advocating for your own life, the drug that you want, I’ll find a way to cover my ass with another expert report (commissioned by me to give me the answer I need to provide cover to make it look like our system consists of something other than the government exercising a monopoly on the arbitrary rationing of health care services.)

Put it in your pipe and smoke it, Palin-haters of the right and left! (And you too, brainwashed Canucks…)

UPDATE: The bureaucrats announce, to no one’s surprise, that they will fund the patient’s treatment after all. The death panel comes through for Ms. Anzarut, and the minister announces what a wonderful world it is!


Filed under Broken Socialist Health Care System, Leftist Duplicity, Ontario Politics, Statism Gone Wild