Wrong Side of History

Can't believe Phil McColeman tweeted THIS:

AFTER:

• Patrick Brown, a.k.a. "@brownbarrie", was forced to resign as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario after reportedly committing sexual misconduct against two young women, one of whom worked for him.
• Years of rumours about Brown's lecherous propensities.
• When the sexual misconduct story broke, Brown's staff resigned en masse (because, you know, they clearly thought the story was false).
• Brown was kicked out of the PC caucus. AND
• Brown was accused of falsely inflating PC party membership numbers.

And Phil has kept the tweet posted even AFTER:

• Brown is being investigated by the Integrity Commissioner for failing to declare rental income on his home. 
• Brown allegedly took his 23-year-old intern/girlfriend (*BROWN IS ALMOST FORTY YEARS OLD*) on a trip to India and other countries without disclosing the gifted trips, and on the pretext that she was a staffer.
• There are real questions about a possible (?) $375,000 payment to Brown from a guy who wanted to be a PC candidate... a payment that could be for a number of reasons but none of them seem legitimate.

Phil- what if one of these young women was someone you knew personally, maybe even someone you were related to, and you heard she was being taken advantage of by her boss. A boss who was stone sober and got her extremely drunk and then tried to have sex with her. Would you be "proud to support" that man? ... ... UNREAL

We were softening on you after your nice gesture reaching across the aisle to bid adieu to Brant's MP. But maybe you only know how to be nice to other men.   Cya.

Protest against Phil's Bill

Some engaged citizens went to Phil's office on Saturday to protest Bill C-51.

For those of you who aren't familiar, Bill C-51 is a law that will basically allow the government to spy on you and violate all sorts of Canadians' rights.

At Dump Phil, we are SHOCKED and APPALLED that Phil is not standing up for the rights and freedoms of Canadians.

Phil Dabbles in International Law, Slow Head-Shaking Ensues

Phil McColeman, in addition to doing virtually nothing over the past year, has now decided that he is an EXPERT in international and constitutional law. He gave a speech about the so-called "Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act", a law that became subject to a constitutional challenge the day after it became law.

First, Phil says that Canada should strip anyone of citizenship if he or she engages in terrorism. Okay. Terrorists commit terrible acts, true. Terrorism should be condemned in all its forms, true. But at the same time, it is literally illegal under international human rights law to make a person without any citizenship. You simply cannot turn someone into a stateless refugee. But human rights, that's never bothered Phil or the Conservatives.

(BTW, the only reason that Phil was not around Parliament during the recent tragic shooting was because he left for work at 10:00 a.m. that day #stopthegravytrain).

Second, Phil says that CSIS should be able to spy in foreign countries, and that the Canadian constitution is the only relevant law in such a situation. Mm-hm. So don't know if you've heard about this new idea that's been around since, oh, about 1648, and it's called "sovereignty". It's the idea that one country can't just go barging around in another country without the latter's permission. But it's all gravy, Phil says, because democracy-lovin' Canada doesn't like the governments in the countries whose sovereignty we'd be violating. So if the government of a democractic country like Benin decided to send its secret police into Canada to start snooping around, without telling the Canadian government, Phil would be totally fine with that. Or if a country like, say, Russia decided to start rustling up trouble in a country like, say, Ukraine, Phil would be totally fine with that too.

P.S. Thanks Phil for reminding us that terrorism is bad. You want a cookie? Great. Now please stop blowing smoke and start addressing substantive issues like Ontario's sagging economy or environmental damage and global warming.

What Phil Gets Paid By The Taxpayers To Do

Some of us wonder what Phil gets paid a healthy six-figure income (plus pension!) to do.  Here's how one of Canada's best-known political journalists recently summed it up on Twitter:

(If you're curious, here's the link to Phil's whole speech.)

"SO31s" refers to Standing Order 31.  In Parliament, sometimes an MP wants to mention a prominent member of their community, or a local sports team that has made the MP's riding proud.  The S.O.31 allows the MP to make a short speech about these topics in Parliament.

Phil McColeman, however, has chosen to use his S.O.31 for the same tired rhetoric churned out by his party on a daily basis.  Phil, this is why people are tired of politics.  Even David Akin found it ridiculous, as evidenced by his clearly sarcastic tweet.

So this is what Phil spends his time doing while the taxpayer pays him six figures a year.  This is pretty embarassing for anybody who lives in Brant.  We here at this non-partisan blog are simply disgusted.

Phil may eventually decide to grow up and stop this nonsense.  But not likely because he's been doing this type of thing for years.  More likely, it is time for Brant to Dump Phil!!

Phil and the Unphair Elections Act

Phil McColeman prides himself on having helped develop the Laurier Brant campus (even taking credit for work that his government didn't do).  So why does Phil support a bill that would make it difficult or impossible for students in Brantford to vote?

The bill is the so-called "Fair Elections Act".  The opposition parties in Parliament have dubbed it the "Unfair Elections Act", and for good reason.  The bill does a lot of really bad things for Canadian democracy, such as getting rid of vouching at polling stations.  This doesn't sound that bad, but think about this: how many students who live in Brant to attend university or college, but aren't registered with Elections Canada to vote in Brant?  A lot of these students don't have ID that proves their current address.  So in the next election, they won't be able to vote.

Let's think about that for a second.  Why would Conservatives like Phil want to make it harder for students to vote (in addition to poor people and marginalized groups)?  Maybe it's because these people don't normally vote Conservative.  This might sound like a conspiracy theory, but consider the following quote from Andrew Coyne, a proudly conservative journalist:

In normal times, under a normal government, the Fair Elections Act would have been withdrawn by now, or at least be in serious trouble. The past few weeks have seen the bill denounced as a threat to democracy by the chief electoral officer, the former chief electoral officer, several provincial elections officials, academic experts domestic and foreign, and newspaper editorials across the country.  Thursday they were joined by Harry Neufeld, the former chief electoral officer of British Columbia and the author of an inquiry into irregularities in the 2011 election.

What is Phil's response to the "Fair Elections Act"?  My guess is he's still sitting on the backbench clapping away every time the Conservative members resort to cover-ups, misrepresentations and outright lies when defending the Unfair Elections Act.

Phil is a weak MP who does not care about the institution of democracy.  In 2015, let's show that we care about democracy by voting to Dump Phil!

Rob Ford / Phil McColeman comparison

There's been a lot of news lately about Rob Ford, and we here at Dump Phil thought it would be a worthy exercise to compare the world-famous mayor with our own Member of Parliament.  So here goes:

Rob Ford	Phil McColeman
Man	Man
Mayor of the City of Toronto	Member of Parliament for Brant
conservative	Conservative
Former labelmaker	Former construction guy
Likes Stephen Harper	Worships Stephen Harper
Does not wear glasses	Wears glasses
Has smoked crack cocaine	Criticizes the Liberals for considering regulating marijuana
#1 priority = subways	#1 priority = land claims
Lives in the Golden Horseshoe	Lives in Greater Golden Horseshoe
Has made some progress on subways	Has made no progress on land claims
“Tough on crime”	“Tough on crime”
Leader of Ford Nation	Not well-liked by First Nations
Lied about not doing drugs	Lied about his government’s involvement with Laurier Brant
Politically closed-minded	Politically closed-minded
Wears exciting neckties	Wears boring neckties

In conclusion, we'll let you draw your own conclusions!

Phil Silent on Scandal

Do you hear that?

...

... that's the sound of silence.

Phil McColeman's silence, to be precise.

Canada is in the midst of a political scandal that goes to the highest levels of government.  Specifically, to the Prime Minister's Office, you know the guys who whip Phil and other MPs into behaving like trained seals with the promise of some obscure committee chair appointment.

Yet Phil McColeman is silent.

You have to wonder: Does Phil represent the people of Brant, or does Phil represent the PMO?  The PMO tried to cover up the fact that Senator Mike Duffy claimed ineligible expenses from the Canadian taxpayers.  Stephen Harper's right-hand man paid $90,000, and the Conservative Party of Canada paid another $13,500 in taxpayer-subsidized funds.  These payments allowed Duffy to "repay" his ineligible expenses, and a Senate committee led by Conservatives whitewashed an investigative report on Duffy's expenses.  This coverup was all done to protect the Conservative brand and Mike Duffy, who was a leading Conservative fundraiser.

Yet Phil McColeman is silent.

Phil must know that there are two possibilities with respect to the Senate scandal:

1. Stephen Harper is lying.  This is substantiated by the fact that Harper's story keeps changing.
2. Stephen Harper deliberately ignored the truth.  But willful blindness or recklessness is no defence to a crime.  Harper created the PMO, and he must take responsibility for its wrong and possibly criminal acts.

Yet Phil McColeman is silent.

Phil McColeman, Seal of Approval

Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber recently quit the Conservative caucus because he was tired of behaving like a "trained seal".

Rathgeber said that he was tired of reading statements in the House of Commons that were prepared by PMO staffers half his age. He quit the Conservative caucus so that he could properly represent his constituents in the riding of Edmonton-St. Albert, instead of being a backbencher representing 22-year-old staffers in the Prime Minister's Office.

Some Conservative MPs immediately made statements that they are NOT "trained seals" (which, I'm sure, totally reassured their constituents).

So how does Phil McColeman shape up?

Phil McColeman is the most obedient seal in the entire Conservative caucus!

Let's summarize some of his recent statements in the House of Commons:

• A partisan attack on the NDP;
• Another partisan attack on the NDP;
• A brief statement about how awesome the Economic Action Plan is (you know, the same program for which the Conservatives spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars on ads featuring a distinctly Conservative blue hue); and
• A defence of the temporary foreign worker program, for which the Conservatives have come under fire lately.

And he's just as obedient on Twitter:

@mary_ogrady @randysroberts you are absolutely correct Mary. The CBC`s misled Canadians with this story. There is no secret fund.
— Phil McColeman (@Phil4Brant) June 7, 2013

That means that over one million more Canadians are working today than during the bottom of the global recession!
— Phil McColeman (@Phil4Brant) June 7, 2013

Excellent speech delivered by @pmharper at this morning's caucus meeting facebook.com/phil.mccoleman…
— Phil McColeman (@Phil4Brant) May 21, 2013

And the usual retweets (click on the images to enlarge):

Here are some recent headlines from Phil's website:

• Economic Action Plan 2013 continues focus on jobs, growth and long-term prosperity
• PM announces judicial appointments for British Columbia, Ontario and Saskatchewan
• PM to participate in G-8 Lough Erne Summit and visit the United Kingdom, France and Ireland

Phil McColeman is nothing but a TRAINED SEAL OF APPROVAL for everything Prime Minister Stephen Harper does. The PMO has trained him well.

 

Dump Phil Fan Art

From a fan (of this blog, not of Phil):

Dump Phil McColeman

(click photo to enlarge)

Will Phil waste YOUR tax dollars on attack ads?

Wow... we've been quiet on this blog for a while!  That's in part because Phil McColeman has been quiet too.

For example, Phil was quiet when some of his Conservative colleagues spoke out against being muzzled by Prime Minister Harper in the House of Commons.  Did Phil join them?  Absolutely not!  Phil is still repeating the same old drivel that is, in all likelihood, written by 22-year-old staffers in the PMO (e.g. see this speech, and this speech, and this speech.... etc. ad nauseam).  In this blog, we have already compared Phil's efficacy as a Member of Parliament to that of a fire hydrant.  For the time being, it appears that neither the fire hydrant nor the Honourable Member for Brant has any intention of changing its inanimate ways.

But on to more exciting matters.  Prime Minister Harper recently announced that you, the hard-working, taxpaying, country-loving citizen, are going to be paying 100% of the costs of a new Conservative Party initiative: attack ads targeting Justin Trudeau.

Your tax dollars at work

Now, we here at this non-partisan blog remember a time when the Conservatives preached respect for the taxpayer, and we applauded that line.  Several Conservative MPs apparently still respect the taxpayer, and have spoken out against using taxpayer dollars to pay for these attack ads.  These MPs are refusing to mail the taxpayer-funded attack ads to their constituents.

The issue facing Phil today is: will he stand with his principled colleagues and refuse to mail out these taxpayer-funded attack ads?  Or is he going to continue to play the part of the fire hydrant, the muzzled MP, and obey the Prime Minister?

Spirit of Partisanship Stands Out for 2012

In a recent Expositor article, Phil McColeman said that he felt that the "spirit of cooperation" characterized his behaviour in 2012. Yeah right. That's like saying that Bev Oda's tenure was marked with respect for the taxpayer. Phil's 2012 was marked with the same non-cooperative, nonproductive partisanship that this blog has been documenting for the past four years.

Phil is part of the poison that has enveloped Ottawa over the past few years: the poison of hyper-partisanship. In 2012, Phil regularly insulted non-Conservative Members of Parliament, insinuating that they are somehow stupid or not paying attention. At the same time, Phil readily spread misinformation, such as his constant harping on the fictitious "NDP carbon tax". The degree of partisan rhetoric is so high that Phil's statements often come off as just plain ridiculous.

Phil is rude and disrespectful. He is certainly not cooperative.

We here at Dump Phil, a non-partisan blog, are disgusted by Phil's partisan attacks.

Nearly every one of Phil's speeches in the House of Commons in 2012 was marked by partisanship:

• Dec 11, 2012: "...the NDP is working to impose a job-killing carbon tax on Canadians that would raise the price of gas, food, electricity and everything else." [NOTE: This is a complete lie - there is no NDP carbon tax]
•  Dec 10, 2012: "The two propositions by the member need to be in context of the global environment, which, obviously, he is not paying attention to."
• Oct 23, 2012: "Perhaps this comes as a surprise to the member for Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, but my constituents do not want to pay higher prices every time they make a purchase in order to fund wild new NDP spending schemes."
• Oct 17, 2012: "While the NDP talks about helping the needy, our government is getting the job done. While the NDP talks about helping the vulnerable, the reality is it has voted against every single measure we have put forward to help these very people." [NOTE: The NDP only voted against these measures because they were bundled into a super-massive omnibus bill]
• Oct 16, 2012: "One thing that would threaten to undo the success of our small busiess owners is the NDP leader's job-killing carbon tax. The NDP leader's job-killing $21 billion carbon tax would increase the price of everything, including gas, groceries and hydro."
•  Oct 4, 2012: "The NDP leader opposite can deny it all he wants, but his words are clear. The NDP would hit Canadians with a job-killing carbon tax that would drive up the cost of gas, groceries and electricity."
• Sep 24, 2012: "The Leader of the Opposition recently dropped by Brantford to smear our local economy. Perhaps I can help educate the NDP leader as he was clearly not aware of how our government's plan is working to create jobs and opportunities all across my riding."
•  Jun 12, 2012: "This warped view of the NDP members that employers, business owners, entrepreneurs, corporations and companies in this great land of ours are somehow the enemy of this country and of workers could not be further from the truth. This is more warped than I have ever heard anybody speak of before. They are the people who hire people, who take the risks and create the wealth. However, my question for the member is this. How does he square this when the people he represents, who are unionized labour, take their pension money and invest it in these corporations of corporate welfare bums for a return on their investment?"
•  May 31, 2012: "It is interesting that the Liberals like some of the initiatives we are taking and yet they are flip-flopping back and forth."
•  May 14, 2012: "Let us think of an iPod, not to tax it like the NDP would, ..."
•  May 10, 2012: "I might mention to the member that in actual fact, if he cares to look at the actual expenditures of government through the budgets..."
• May 8, 2012: "The NDP leader's choice of the member for Vancouver East as deputy leader is particularly important as it shows who he relies upon the most. We have already demonstrated how his deputy leader is completely out of touch when it comes to getting tough on crime, but that is not the only area where the member opposite has demonstrated poor judgment."
• Apr 30, 2012: "Our government will stand strong against public sector union bosses trying to pick the pockets of their own members to pay for their outlandish media campaigns and vote themselves hefty pension bonuses."
• Mar 28, 2012: "Sadly, every investment our government has made to help the most vulnerable Canadians was opposed by the official opposition, and often with the support of the third party."
• Feb 2, 2012: "Mr. Speaker, that is the fearmongering going on across the aisle. That is what is happening on both the NDP and the Liberal benches as far as creating fear in seniors."
• Feb 2, 2012: "The Liberal Party would increase taxes no matter what, to raise the tax level to whatever is required at whatever point in time, regardless of the economic consequences and what that would mean to the loss of jobs or the economy at the time. Therefore, it does not surprise me that this is the ideology of the Liberal Party."
• Feb 2, 2012: "It always amazes me how the NDP opposition wants to stick its head in the sand about the demographics and the fact that we are attempting to look forward as prudently as we, as a government, can..."
•  Feb 2, 2012: "The fear-mongering coming by the NDP and their Liberal friends will not work." 

I hope that Phil reads these quotes and reflects on what type of politician he wants to be in 2013.

Phil McColeman, our National Embarrassment

On Canada's national broadcaster, the CBC, Phil McColeman again embarrassed Brant. For those of us who thought that his vote for the anti-choice movement had signified a break from his Dear Leader Stephen Harper, we were mistaken.

Phil McColeman yesterday spilled this ultra-partisan vitriol in the most hallowed forum we call the House of Commons:

Mr. Speaker, when running for his party's leadership in 2011, the NDP leader promised a carbon tax that would go even further than the NDP's 2011 election platform. The NDP leader's plan would apply a carbon tax to all major sources of GHG emissions, not just the 700 largest industrial emitters envisaged in the NDP 2011 election platform.

In explaining his reason for expanding the scope of the NDP carbon tax, the NDP leader said that Canada “can no longer afford to focus only on the worst of the worst”. That means even more money taken from Canadian families than the $21 billion the NDP is banking on. The NDP leader opposite can deny it all he wants, but his words are clear. The NDP would hit Canadians with a job-killing carbon tax that would drive up the cost of gas, groceries and electricity.

It's embarrassing.

First of all, Phil totally exhausted that whole "carbon tax" rhetoric in the 2008 election.

Second of all, Phil, do you really not care about the environment that much? You have kids. Do you really want your children to grow up in a world that you not only you did nothing to protect, but  in which you fought to defeat those who sought to protect it? Do you want them to drink that dirty water, to breathe that dirty air? Are you willing to pay that price, for partisan politics?

Thirdly, the NDP is only seeking to implement the same cap-and-trade system that your very own party, the Conservatives, argued in favour of in 2004 and 2008. You argued for cap-and trade while you were demonizing Stéphane Dion for his carbon tax.

So… how does it feel to be a puppet of the hyper-partisan twenty-one year olds who run Stephen Harper's office?

And by the way, Mr. MP, you also embarrassed Brant in the Huffington Post (not a real newspaper, but read by many) and Canada's number one political source, Maclean's Magazine.

Phil Votes Against Women's Rights

Today, in Ottawa, in the House of Commons, a shameful spectacle unfolded. Phil McColeman, representative for Brant, voted to re-open the abortion debate.

Phil has to realize that he's more than just bumblin' Phil McColeman. His job is to represent his constituents. Phil may be anti-choice personally, and that's okay. We're all entitled to our opinions. But when he takes his personal ideological beliefs and forces them into the political sphere, that's where it becomes a problem. Brantford is not full of Tea Party supporters, and Phil's not representing Brant when he votes like a Tea Partier.

Decades of progress in women's rights, and Phil would have dumped them like yesterday's trash. Well, if ever we needed a sign, here it is: it's time to DUMP PHIL.

Phil Honours Troops by Spending $750,000 to Fight Them in Court

As the Globe & Mail reported today, the Conservative government wasted $750,000 of taxpayers' money on legal fees fighting veterans who just want a fair pension.

Phil McColeman often uses military troops and veterans for political posturing – e.g. here, here, here, here, and here.

But when it comes to paying veterans their fair share, where's Phil?? Probably at the bank deciding how to invest his own gold-plated MP pension.

Abortion

It goes to a vote Wednesday. What will Phil do?? He has three options. He can join the Tea Party caucus of the Conservative party, where we know his heart truly lies. He can oppose the motion and stay loyal to the Dear Leader. Or he can skip the vote together and risk incurring the wrath of whichever side loses (and appear a coward at the same time). This is going to be an exciting week, folks.

Will Phil Kill Abortion Bill?

As noted earlier on DumpPhil.ca, Phil McColeman recently presented six petitions before Parliament asking to re-open the abortion debate. Now, we need to ask: How is Phil going to vote on Motion 312?

Motion 312 is a private member's motion put forward by Phil's Conservative colleague Stephen Woodworth, who hails from neighbouring Kitchener (click here to read Motion 312 on Woodworth's website). Motion 312 would re-open the abortion debate by re-opening the debate about when life begins – currently, Criminal Code s. 223 states that life begins at the moment of birth. If the Conservatives change that law to state that life begins earlier (for example, if the Conservatives decide that life begins at the moment that sperm fertilizes a female egg), then abortion would be legally considered murder and, therefore, quite illegal.

Phil McColeman has not stated how he will vote on this bill. But we can be fairly certain that Phil supports re-opening the abortion debate in Canada, for the following reasons:

• Phil chose to present six petitions before Parliament asking for the abortion debate to be re-opened.
• Phil has attended pro-life, anti-abortion rallies and events in the past.
• Phil has made his small-c conservative stance clear with respect on other so-called "family" issues, by opposing a bill that would have protected transgendered people from hate crimes and by opposing same-sex marriage.
• Phil has earned the support of pro-life, anti-abortion groups.

Phil owes it to his constituents to come right out and state that he wants to re-open the abortion debate, notwithstanding that it could result in the deprivation of women's rights across the country. Here's a recent letter to the editor calling Phil out for his cowardly silence:

Get off the fence, Phil

Pro-choice or pro-life? Politicians do not get elected into office without being asked this question multiple times. So, when it comes to Motion 312, which calls for a parliamentary committee to re-determine when human life begins, it is expected that most politicians will know how they are going to vote. They will likely vote the way they told their constituents they were going to when the pro-life vs. pro-choice question came up during their election campaigns.

This however, does not seem to be the case for Brant MP Phil McColeman, who claims to be on the fence about the issue, despite having ran for office three times, and despite belonging to a party that repeatedly stated it would not be re-opening the abortion debate. The Conservative party was in fact, so adamant about this, that Prime Minister Stephen Harper even went as far as to state “as long as I’m Prime Minister we are not reopening the abortion debate”(Apr. 21, 2011. CBC). Interestingly enough, the individual that put forth this motion is actually a member of the Conservative party. Maybe he was trying to send Mr. Harper a message..

E. Jones
Brantford

On a final note, DumpPhil.ca would like to wish a Happy Mother's Day to all the mothers out there, and also offer our support for a woman's freedom to choose whether she will become a mother or not.

Bil C-30 – Looking Past Phil’s Political Spin

Phil McColeman recently wrote an interesting and misleading editorial in the Brant News on Bill C-30, the “online spying” bill that led to the infamous @vickileaks30 Twitter account. Of course, we here at Dump Phil also decry personal attacks of any kind, and we feel that criticism of any politician should be limited to his or her performance as a politician.

Phil is correct when he writes that “This proposed legislation will not allow police to read e-mails or browse web history without a warrant.” The police cannot just hack into your computer and go through your files.

But if you read the actual legislation, you will see that the Bill C-30 can and will constitute a grave intrusion on your online privacy.

The first part of Bill C-30 (sections 6 – 15) require all Internet service providers to record your IP address, and to have the capability to track your IP address to your name and address. What is an IP address? It’s like a digital fingerprint that you leave on any website that you visit. And anyone who runs any website you visit has access to those “fingerprints”. The police will also have access to those "fingerprints". So under Bill C-30, your Internet company is now obligated by law to keep a file that links that “fingerprint” to your name and address.

The second part of Bill C-30 (sections 15 – 21) lets the police demand that the Internet service provider give them the file connecting your IP address to your name and address, and the Internet service provider has to comply. In other words, all the police have to do is ask your Internet company, “Who does this digital fingerprint belong to?”, and your Internet company has to give the police your name and address. The most important part about these sections is that they DO NOT REQUIRE A WARRANT.

The final part of Bill C-30 (section 23) overrides another law designed to protect your privacy (the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, or "PIPEDA"). The PIPEDA requires a warrant if the police want to get your name and address based on your IP address, except in cases of emergency like matters of national security.

Phil didn’t mention any of this in his article, because he doesn’t want you to know. Phil doesn’t want you to know that experts have said that Bill C-30 will likely result in police “fishing expeditions” that will compromise your online privacy. The police will be able to track your IP address, and then ask your internet company for your name and address. In this way, the authorities will easily be able to figure out what you’ve been up to online. Most importantly, the authorities will be able to do this WITHOUT A WARRANT.

Been researching explosives for a school science project? You might get police knocking on your door. Been looking at adult pornography online? Busted. Been leaving anonymous comments on Dump Phil? You’re not so anonymous anymore.

The power that Bill C-30 gives the police is massive. For Phil to compare it to a phone book is misleading and insulting to the intelligent citizens of Brant. I encourage all of Dump Phil’s loyal fans (and loyal detractors) to do their own research on Bill C-30. Even a simple Google search will bring up lots of results agreeing with what I have argued here.

Phil McColeman Attempts to Reopen Abortion Debate

Yesterday, Phil McColeman stood up in Parliament and said this:

Mr. Speaker, I have six petitions to present from my constituents asking the House of Commons to determine when a fetus becomes a human being.

In essence, he was asking the Canadian government to reopen the abortion debate. He did not have to present the petitions, he chose to present the petitions.

The optics of this alone are fantastic. A middle-aged white guy standing up in Parliament and trying to overturn decades of progress for women’s rights. Amazing. Bravo. Somebody give this guy a medal. Somebody name a park after him.

This is not the first time I have wondered: What. On. Earth. Is. Phil. McColeman. Thinking?!?!?!?

Phil McColeman Used American Robo-call Company

Last election, Phil McColeman used Front Porch Strategies, a U.S. robocall company.

We know that Phil McColeman paid Front Porch Strategies during the 2011 election campaign (directly contrary to what Stephen Harper claimed in Parliament).

We know that Phil has used Front Porch Strategies to host tele-townhalls.

We now need to know whether Phil also used Front Porch Strategies to call voters. We need to know for a couple of reasons:

First, it is hypocritical for Phil to use a U.S. company while he spends so much time talking about creating jobs for Canadians. In fact, there's a great call centre in downtown Brantford. Why does Phil use an American company instead of contributing to Canadian jobs?

Second, Front Porch Strategies does most of its work for the Republican Party. If Phil is using a Republican call centre, it is just importing into Canada the dirty, opportunistic, U.S.-style political tactics that Phil himself has criticized in the past.

Third, if Phil used Front Porch to deliver automated phonecalls, perhaps he used the calls to send Liberal/NDP voters to non-existent voting locations. As the Robo-call scandal deepens, we need to know if Phil was involved

Phil needs to come clean on the extent of his involvement with Front Porch Strategies. And if he has any balls, he should also call for a public inquiry into the Robo-call election fraud.

Phreedom 67

Here's a great cartoon from the Brant News. It features Phil pretending to care about seniors, while at the same time slashing their Old-Age Security benefits, and hiding his gold-plated MP pension behind his back:

Ironically, Phil just announced that he was in fact holding a town hall on OAS this week. However, he did not post the time and date of the event on the "events" section of his website, and only buried the details at the bottom of a press release, where he only gave one day's notice!!! He clearly did not want many people to attend the event other than his cronies who already knew about it.