Taking a stand

Well, many people have commented in the past that Kennedy hasn't really been active on the policy front. But now, the big story in the news in terms of leadership is Kennedy's position on Afghanistan. Some don't like this position. Personally I see some good and some bad points in this.

I like the fact that we should have our own independant voice on this. Like it or not, we're in there. But if we are there, we should have a say how it's going. I do think we really need to look at what's going on there and think about what we're doing. If we really aren't helping to re-build the Afghan society, then why are we there?

However, I'm not a big fan of the threat itself. It does have a sense of, "we're not getting what we want, so let's get out of there." In any case, whether we are trying to be peacekeepers or occupiers, I do believe we should be there (in one case to help them out, in the second to prevent them from reverting to their old ways). Pulling out early could be worse than staying in too long.

But all in all, whether you agree with Kennedy on this or not, he's willing to take a stand on this tough issue. And just like I respect Ignatieff for his strong viewpoints (as much as I disagree with them), you've gotta respect Gerard for his.

Ontario Surplus

Well, they've done it. With over a year until elections, the Ontario Government has a surplus. Not a big one (300M), but pretty good coming back from 5.5B in the hole to start off.

Stop Iggy!

Back to politics, there's been a recent stir about the Stop Iggy website that has sprung up. Personally, I don't think Ignatieff is the right guy to lead the party. I think he will have difficulties explaining his academic viewpoints to the general public, I think he still needs to work on avoiding problematic soundbites, and I do think that he is too close to Harper on some issues.

But that's still no reason to start up a site to try to get him to lose. Especially one based on mis-information such as it is, and especially using membership lists to advertise. I personally haven't received one of those e-mails, but I do find it quite unprofessional to do that. You want to stop Ignatieff? Don't do it by mass e-mailing. Try to convince people face-to-face. Let them respond. Let them criticize your points. Welcome the challenge. If you sway them, good for you. If you don't, then maybe he's not so bad.

Adios Pluto, it was fun while it lasted

Well, the IAU has come down hard and here's the ruling: No more Pluto. We're back down to 8 planets, with Pluto, Xena, and Ceres now belonging to another "dwarf planet" category. So all in all, it looks like they just listened to me while making their decision.

Liberals and the Middle East

I've tried a few times to figure out what to write for this post. I usually avoid talking middle-east, since it's a topic I don't know too much about, and it's very divisive, even within people who share other viewpoints (see Volpe's campaign for details).

First off, I can see a point to Boris' comments on Hezbollah. Hezbollah is still evil, and we definitely should not support them in the least, but it probably doesn't hurt to be able to talk to them to try to hammer out some sort of deal which doesn't involve wiping out Israel.

Next, Boris made some comments about Israel which I like less. I haven't seen the full text of his speech, but if he did say that Israel was doing "state terrorism", then that's something which should be denounced. If he was simply saying that Israel went too far in their responce (which most of us would agree with), then perhaps he just needs to re-think his wording.

Finally, "Thomas", from thelongwalk.ca deserves the criticism he's gotten. I hope he will change his opinions in time, and he did do the right thing in resigning his post at BC YL. I don't blame Warren for getting upset about it.

As Jason mentions, anti-semites are involved in all walks of society. While I definitely think everyone within the party is entitled to their opinions, there's a limit to what we can support. Cerberus has a good post up detailing statements made by the top leadership contenders on Hezbollah and this recent mess.

*Update: Far and Wide has a very good post up about this as well. Very well thought out and reasoned.

Go Kennedy!

I've joined the Kennedy blogroll. I could lie and say in the last 3 days, since having a post up saying how Kennedy keeps getting shafted by the media, I've suddenly decided to support the team. The truth is I've been supporting Kennedy for a fair bit of time now.

So why do I support Kennedy? Well obviously I think he'd be the best leader for the party.

-He's one of the younger ones: if we happen to lose, I want my leader to be able to stick around to fight the next one. Also, we're in a world of younger politicians. Harper, McGuinty, Lord, even Charest are all still fairly young. Martin looked old last campaign, and that didn't help him.

-He's been successful in politics: Sure, he didn't win the Ontario leadership back in 1996, but he came close, and then went on to be successful with the guy he lost to. He's had a good track record in politics, and with his time in Ontario, knows what the HOC can be like

-He's the only one without significant baggage: Rae led Ontario in a depression, Iggy's lived out of the country for a while, Dryden can't speak french. Even a guy like Dion, who personally comes with very little baggage as well, could probably be roped into sponsorship. Ask anyone what the only real negatives about Kennedy are and at most you'll find stuff he is improving upon and practising (french, provincial outlook) or the fact that he's 3 credits shy of graduating university.

-He does have good ideas: For some reason, everyone keeps knocking him for a lack of ideas. But so far in the campaign, I think he's about the only candidate who has actually put out policies. Is he the most knowledgeable on foreign affairs or the environment? No, probably not. But he still knows enough about them to be able to put out thoughtful policies and be able to debate them.

-Mostly of all, he's likable, he's electable, and he's a politician. If Rae hadn't been leader of the NDP during a recession, he'd be a great candidate. If Iggy had been a cabinet minister for a few years, he'd be a much better candidate. If Brison had been in the party for a few more years, he'd be a good candidate. But they each have their little flaws. Not major ones, and I do think that we have 5-6 people who would make for good leaders, but I also believe that Kennedy has enough of the good, and little enough of the bad to be able to be a very good leader, and as the leadership campaign goes forward, I think he'll be the best leader for the party when we head into an election next spring.

Why does Kennedy get shunned?

Being politically active, I follow the news. And being a Liberal, I follow leadership. I went to the OYL summerfling. I'll watch Politics and CPAC, even if I'm not bored. And I try to read almost every story on leadership coming out of the Globe, the Star, and CBC.

However what I've noticed is in all the generic recaps, Kennedy really doesn't get much respect. At the OYL summerfling, he finished one vote behind Ignatieff. The early reports had him leading in membership sales in half the country. The only place his membership sales were low was Quebec. Yet after all that, the media still seems to think that it will come down to Rae and Ignatieff.

In the end, on the final ballot, it might get down to them, but so far based on membership sales, Kennedy is right there with Ignatieff. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see him actually have the largest delegate count come October 1st. Yet it still seems the media doesn't consider him a serious candidate. Not asking for a lot, but a little more respect for a man who's got as good a shot as anyone at being the next Liberal leader would be nice.

Now for something more political

Well, since I got into this mostly to talk about politics, and now that I've gotten my scientific viewpoint out of the way, let's talk about leadership a bit.

Maurizio quitting: Sad to see him leave the race. I hoped he would stay in until the end, but I guess he's gotten him name out there a bit. Also a bit sad to see him not really garner much real support (he was usually one of the guys nobody could name when talking candidates). Hopefully his name is out there enough now, and I wish him the best of luck in the future.

Orchard joining Dion: A big pickup for Dion. While many people aren't too fond of Orchard, he does bring fairly substantial support, especially in Saskatchewan.

General gabbery: It's going to be exciting the last little bit until the DSM's in September. Everyone's going to be going crazy in September, especially the youth just starting back in classes. Not only do we have to get ready for the voting goodness, we've got to try to convince the leadership camps for one last visit to campus, we've got to make sure everyone knows what to do on the big day, and we've also got to do normal club stuff (like, you know, recruiting the frosh). I for one can't wait!

Xena: new planet?

With the Recent Announcement that we may be gaining a few more planets, I thought I should share my thoughts on it.

First off, as most scientists say, no way should Pluto keep its planetary status and not give the same to Xena (or 2003 UB313 to its friends), since it's bigger.

But having said that, I debated for quite a while what should be done. Obviously for sentimental reasons it would be nice for Pluto to still be a planet, since that's what we've all grown up with.

But the new proposal, to have Pluto and Xena, as well as Charon (Pluto's partner) and Ceres (a large asteroid) join the ranks of the "big 8" irks me. Especially when there could be as many as a dozen more of these things out there. I don't mind them all being called plutons, but I don't like them being planets.

So I say, keep the total number of planets to 8. It's a good round number (well, a good cube number). It makes there 4 inner solid planets and 4 outer gas planets, which seems like a nice distinction, and basically closes the door to constantly having to update textbooks. Keep plutons in their own category, which will grow and change as we discover more about the outer reaches of our solar system, but don't keep changing the planets around on us.

Welcome!

Well, since any idiot can have a blog, I figure I should be able to have one.

Let me start off by talking about myself. I'm a university student at the University of Waterloo (hence the "UW" in my name) studying Computer Science. I'm originally from Montreal (hence the "Habs" part), and have lived in Calgary as well (which doesn't appear in my user name, but it was worth mentioning anyways). I am a proud Liberal, and my interest in blogging sprung from there.

I first got introduced to blogging a few years ago, referred to by friends to various personal and political blogs. After a bit, I started keeping my own personal one (which even I find quite dry and boring to read), and I've continued to read some more famous political ones (my favourites include Calgary Grit and Capitalist Pig vs Socialist Swine, as well as browsing the RSS feed of Progressive Bloggers). Then a few months ago, I've started becoming slightly more than just a lurker, posting a few comments.

Now, I'm ready for the next step, keeping my own. What I will post about will come out soon, but my guess it will be mostly political, but I'll try to post on other matters as well (coming shortly, my talk about planets). That's it for now, and hopefully I'll start up with some real post in the coming days.