Is this a liberal problem? The answer is obviously no. Corruption in government is a world wide phenomena, Canada is no different. I’ve personally seen it at the municipal level, had 1st hand accounts of it at the provincial level, and now adscam at the federal level (i’m sure there are way more federal ones that I know of too, I’m just too lazy to search).

This is a political problem inherint in the system. Too much good ol’ boys and not enough ‘fresh faces’. There are so few politicians who get into it because they are interested in helping their country. So now its up to the electorate. Right now, the pollsters are in full swing figuring out how each of the parties might do if a snap election was to be called. Do they care about our interests? Hell no, just their powerlevel, and how to hold on to what they’ve got, and get more. Rant done.

The now famous blog run by �Ed Morrissey � Captain Ed to his friends� has updated again, this time with even more damning testimony from the Gomery enquiry. I still can’t post the details due to legal concerns and the fact that I think my host is spineless. Indeed,

Canada’s attorney general is probing possible breaches of a publication ban set up to protect explosive testimony at the AdScam inquiry.

That said, I have to agree with many of the comments on TBTCBN (The blog that cannot be named), and around the blogosphere in that the situation is potentially deadly stuff for the current Government. What is even scarier is what happens should the current government fail. Already the impact of the testimony has caused the government to rewrite the budget, dropping Kyoto in order to avert a non-confidence vote. What happens if that doesn’t work and we get to voting in 5 weeks? Are Ontarians ready to vote Conservative? The question will be, the devil you know vs. the devil you don’t.

Lastly, if I link to a source that links to publication ban material, am I in trouble. Here is a link to google, which is full of the stuff.

Website owners and bloggers began thumbing their nose at the publication ban on the weekend. A U.S. right-wing blogger posted the first accounts of Brault’s testimony on Saturday and Canadian bloggers have followed suit.

Winnipeg blogger Michael Napier said the threat of being hauled into court to face contempt charges won’t cause him to pull the testimony excerpts from his site. Since he posted the information, traffic on his site has doubled. “Does the right of one person override the right of 32 million people?” Napier asked.

I would argue that the rights of one persons fair trial outweigh the rights of the Canadian peoples right to immeadiate information. At anyrate, it will be interesting to see if the blog run by “Ed Morrissey — Captain Ed to his friends” continues to publish information.

Will Gomery’s dastardly plan succeed? Will Captain Ed and the blogosphere get out of the sticky situation they find themselves in? Will Batgirl arrive to stop Penguin yet again? Tune in tomorrow…same blogosphere time…same blogosphere channel.

Source: Sun

Blogosphere 1, Gomery 0

The story is now making the rounds of the blogosphere, it seems people must like a good scandal combined with a hush hush trial, sordid details, and alledged mob connections. Who would have thought? I’m still not clear on the law (would I get in trouble if I link to a site that links to banned information — i’m thinking not) so I won’t link directly to more info, just to this running commentary of the issue on Slashdot.

As an aside, this subject is very popular, making today one of MaxPower’s best ever days in terms of visitors. Thanks peeps! Also, I stand by my assertions that 2 conservatives have eaten babies.

Another stupid law, this time in my backyard! I guess stupid politicians are everywhere. If passed into law this bill would address, “higher prices for clothes, shoes, hair cuts and other services.”

I’m all for fairness, but shouldn’t the market determine pricing? If femals feel they get gouged at shop X, then don’t shop there any more. The way I understand capitalism is that the price of a good or service is determined by how much people would be willing to pay for it. I know I’m not willing to pay more for fancy dry skin creme. I buy the cheap stuff, that doesn’t smell bad. In general, the guy ‘themed’ cremes are cheaper. Perhaps this is because guys don’t buy the expensive skin cremes ergo, the price of male themed skin cremes is cheaper. Would this bill force the price of skin creme for men higher? The humanity!

Besides, on average doesn’t a womens haircut require more work and skill than a mans?

Is Gender-Based Pricing Fair?

It must be that ‘the man’ thinks this can be easily done. Just another reason to move to Utah: 10 wives, and no porn. Does this mean that the people with 10 wives need porn too? Or is that that the 9 guys without need it really bad.

Utah governor weighs antiporn proposal

Should the people who make and sell “violent video” games be held accountable if someone commits a crime because of playing them?

Washington state lawmakers are considering adding liability to game makers and sellers of violent video games liable if someone under 17 years old commits a crime, due in any part, to playing a game. So does that mean that if someone under 17 happens to learn how to do some civic good from video games that ‘game makers and sellers of educational video games be rewarded?

Nope.

Link