Andrew Coyne is puzzled. He can’t figure out why one type of law proposed by a left-wing party was acceptable and didn’t cause (fabricated) outrage, while the same law tabled by a conservative party engenders not only criticism but screams of “The end is nigh”.

When the Liberal government of Paul Martin introduced the Modernization of Investigative Techniques Act in November of 2005, it received comparatively little attention. As the columnist Thomas Walkom described it in the Toronto Star, the bill would require Internet and telephone companies “to install equipment that would allow the state to monitor all of their customers . . . (It) would give police . . . the power to demand, without the need for court warrants, any in-formation that (these) companies keep on their customers – including addresses, passwords and credit card information.” The public safety minister at the time, Anne McLellan, was quoted to the effect that the police needed the new powers to go after terrorists and child pornographers.

In other words, more or less the same legislation, supported by more or less the same arguments, as Bill C-30, whose purported horrors have convulsed the nation this past week. Yet it caused nothing like the same fuss. For that matter, neither did an earlier version of the current bill, C-52, introduced in the last Parliament: concern, yes, but not the all-consuming fireball that C-30 detonated.

Coyne, Coyne, Coyne. Where have you been? After so many years in the business of reporting on politics, haven’t you figured out yet that the actions of conservatives and lefties are measured by separate standards?

A Liberal or NDP government could reintroduce the death penalty, and the media and elites wouldn’t say a beep. They’d actually praise the government for being so progressive.

A conservative government doing the same thing would be taken out one by one by a left-wing mob – quite literally (as lefties have a congenital penchant for violence, hence their support for, and coddling of, criminals).

This should put an end to the nonsense of attacking Alberta’s oil sands – especially to the lie that the oil sands are the “biggest environmental catastrophe” this planet has ever known (well, we knew that to be a lie, as the oil sands make up only a tiny fraction of the world’s “greenhouse gas emissions” (if those are, indeed, the problem, which is still unproven) – barely noticeable on a global scale, particularly when compared to car exhausts in the world’s major cities, etc.).

Canada’s government, which has threatened a trade war over a proposed European rule to penalize oil-sands crude in a bid to clean up transportation fuels, has a powerful new argument in its favour, as new research shows other energy sources are far more dangerous to the climate.

On Thursday, a committee of the European Union will vote on a proposed fuel-quality directive intended to reduce the carbon footprint of gasoline and diesel on that continent. The directive directly penalizes oil-sands crude for its high-emissions content, using language that oil-sands supporters and others have called “flawed,” “discriminatory” and worse.

The only reason why “environmentalists” attack the oil sands is that this resource represents capitalism at its best and one of Western civilization’s greatest success story.

Those “environmentalists” couldn’t care less about the environment, because they are only hiding behind the colour green for the sole purpose of destroying Western civilization and introducing socialist/communist (same thing) rule everywhere.

As such, they share a common goal with al-Qaeda – and none other than Osama bin Laden pretended to believe in “man-made global warming” so as to turn those “environmentalists” into his personal volunteer (yet unwitting) army of terrorists in the West – i.e., if you believe in the “man-made global warming lie”, you might just as well join al-Qaeda.

Canada is finally moving out of the Stone Age: the notorious Section 13 of the Human Rights Act is on its way to being abolished.

The campaign to scrap Canada’s ‘hate speech’ clause moved one step closer to victory Wednesday night as the House of Commons voted 158-131 to send it to committee. Of those MPs who voted, the bill was unanimously supported by the majority Conservative government and opposed by all Opposition members, except Liberal Scott Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor).

It’s high time this instrument of persecution was scrapped. So far, it’s been used against truth-speakers and common-sense purveyors by the left and those suffering from a very specific mental disease, political correctness.

With Section 13 out of the way, the real haters in this country, that is, self-righteous and mentally deranged lefties (all those who have filed human rights complaints under the section so far), will finally be out of business and will have to find other, hopefully more productive, endeavours to keep themselves busy.

Whether they find such new activity or not, they should definitely be forced to undergo psychiatric treatment first.

Highly-respected economist Don Drummond opened a major can of whoop-ass on Ontario and the Liberal government. The gist of his report: premier Dalton McGuinty lied to voters ahead of last fall’s election. Virtually nothing the premier has said is even anywhere near the truth. (One columnist suggested a “do-over” for the election, as it was based on nothing but lies.)

The fact: McGuinty took a relatively prosperous province and completely ran its economy into the ground in the years he’s been in power.

According to Drummond, Ontario now requires strong and tough measures if it wants to avoid being branded North America’s Greece (or, actually, something even worse than Greece). It will take spending and program cuts even more drastic than under former premier Mike Harris, substantial increases in personal and consumption taxes, as well as a complete stop to giving in to the constant blackmail from public-sector unions (i.e., the mob).

Naturally, McGuinty won’t do any of that, as this would destroy his “good name” and “legacy”. Much better, therefore, to allow the entire province to go down the tubes.

What a legacy, indeed!

The left-wing Alberta Tories, headed by sullen and always-bitter-looking Alison REDford, are about to lose one of their biggest cheerleaders: the Calgary Herald.

For some time, the Herald couldn’t stop singing the praises of the Tories, and also forced its columnists to toe the pro-Tory line. The height of that nonsense came in the form of a manipulated poll that showed a substantial collapse in the support for the Wildrose Alliance, Alberta’s only conservative party (that poll, of course, was a total and utter fabrication).

But now with the Tories behaving even worse than usual, the editorial board of the newspaper seems to have reached their tipping point, if their latest editorial is any indication.

This past week, one of the paper’s leading columnists was “allowed” to publish an anti-Tory, and pro-Wildrose, column that provided proof that the Tories keep lying about their corrupt and bullying practices.

This would have been unheard of just a few weeks ago.

It’s about time. The Canadian government has finally decided to address the issue of bogus refugees, such as those from Hungary and other ineligible countries.

Technically speaking, under international law, Canada is not obligated to accept any refugees, as refugees are required to seek asylum in the nearest safe country, instead of unlawfully shopping around for the best place to live. As Canada is the nearest safe country only to its neighbour, the United States, whose citizens aren’t eligible anyway, it could reject all applications.

Thankfully, the government is taking a sensible approach, such as speeding up the process of deporting bogus applicants and removing their ability to file equally bogus appeals.

Jason Kenney, the immigration minister, has stated that EU member states will be considered “safe”, as indeed they should be. While the EU itself leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to democracy and lack of corruption, it would be ludicrous to accept refugee claims from EU citizens.

When criminals, or even an entire ethnic group known for its acceptance of petty and more serious crimes, seek asylum in Canada, we must reject them and tell them that being prosecuted for their actions is not the same as being persecuted – thus, they’re not eligible to have their claims granted by the Canadian government.

Apple has come under increasing attack for manufacturing its computers, tablets and gadgets in China, The News Cruncher reported recently. However, as one, trivial, example shows, Made in the USA is not necessarily the seal of quality it used to be.

Simple Solution is a company specializing in products for pet owners. Among other things, it produces training pads for puppies.

The picture below shows two Simple Solution training pads. One was manufactured in China, the other in the United States. On both packages, the company advertises their pads as being “highly absorbent”, but as the picture shows, one pad, the one on the right, doesn’t absorb at all, and the top layer is too loose, posing a tripping hazard for little puppy feet.

Simple Solution training pads for puppies

The pad on the left looks clean and comes with a nice pattern. It is also the one that feels more solid, whereas the one on the right feels extremely flimsy, ready to disintegrate at a single touch. Puppies can step on the pad on the left and not go sliding across the bathroom floor.

So, which of the two pads was manufactured in the US? Surely, it must be the one on the left that looks nice and clean and doesn’t pose a slipping hazard.

Wrong. The pad on the left is the pad that Simple Solution manufactures in China. The one on the right, cheap looking and virtually useless as a product for the intended purpose, has been manufactured in the US – and Simple Solution makes a point of emphasizing that point on the package with a special blue label and “Texas stars”: “Made in the USA”.

Is it any wonder that more and more manufacturing jobs are leaving the US and moving to China and other Asian countries?

When Linda Sloan, president of AUMA, suggested that the Tories make funds paid to municipalities contingent on receiving pro-Tory “sentiments” (such as illegal donations) in return, the Tories feigned outrage and demanded an apology. One Tory party official even called Sloan a “malicious liar”.

The truth of the matter is that the Tories do play partisan games. If a mayor or city council doesn’t toe the Tory line, that municipality will soon find itself ignored. Don Braid provides the proof of this in his column today.

The Tories, who aren’t conservatives anymore, but a left-wing and corrupt cabal, obviously don’t think twice about extracting favours and concessions from those who seek public funds.

This is why the Tories are now under investigation for a minimum of 45 cases of donations fraud – and this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Sloan merely spoke the truth, revealing the true reality of life with the Tories in this province. You must constantly sing their praises, and stuff the occasional dollar bill down their panties, just so that you can get what you’d be entitled to anyway.

Imagine what would happen to a city the size of Calgary if mayor Naheed Nenshi decided to publish anti-Tory opinions on a daily basis. From one day to the next, the Tories would cease all funding for infrastructure, public transit, etc. No doubt they would find some additional ways of dinging the city with even more expenses (as they actually did not long ago).

When former Tory MLA, and now Alberta Liberal leader, Raj Sherman spoke up against the corrupt practices of his then-party, they not only kicked him out of the caucus but also tried to destroy his personal and professional life through character assassination (calling him mentally unstable, which for a medical doctor is a professional death sentence).

That’s how the Tories operate, and Albertans are catching on to what’s going on. Let’s hope they remember all this when they’re called to the polls this spring.

Good column on Alberta’s “Tory NDP” party and its possible intention of raising taxes.

We should also be careful about the assumption that higher tax rates would mean higher revenues and have no other impact. Take Quebec, for example, which has some of the highest tax rates among the provinces: 16 per cent, 20 per cent, and 24 per cent. Presumably, those much higher rates should generate much higher levels of revenue.

Except they don’t. In fact, Alberta’s 10 per cent flat tax generates more personal income tax revenue on a percapita basis than Quebec’s higher rates do.

Moreover, increasing taxes on capital is going to have all sorts of negative impacts on the economy. So, too, will the removing of the simplicity and efficiency of the flat tax.

Raising corporate taxes could be even more detrimental. There’s no shortage of evidence showing that higher corporate taxes are associated with lower rates of growth, lower wages and lower productivity.

Interesting, too, that Rob Breakenridge, the column’s author, seems to be in favour of a sales tax in Alberta (while reducing personal income taxes, of course).

When you’re the most successful company in the country, with more cash stashed away than the US Treasury, you simply must expect to be attacked – even in the most ludicrous and frivolous ways. Case in point: Apple.

The creator of the best personal computers, tablets and other gadgets around (not to mention an operating system that actually deserves to be called that, unlike the various useless and hopelessly flawed iterations of Windows, including the joke that is Windows 8) is being criticized for outsourcing its main manufacturing and assembly work to China. Apple does produce the microprocessors for iPhones and iPads in Texas, but has them put into the devices in China.

Critics say Apple should do more to create American jobs. That’s what Apple is doing, in fact. Not only does the company have a tremendous need for professional retail staff at its myriad Apple Stores, but it also needs a steady stream of creative and innovative “computer people”, i.e., those who can write perfect code or come up with the next big revolution in personal computing.

Apple is also currently building (in itself a major job-creation program) a new HQ in California, shaped like a gigantic spaceship, that will be home to around 16,000 jobs or so when it’s finished.

Of course, the Chinese could do more to improve working conditions for their people (suicides among workers have, sadly, become quite commonplace), but it doesn’t change the fact that any company would be foolish to put itself through the (perpetual) wringer of having to deal with excessive government regulations and, above all, unions and their criminal demands (extortion is a crime, after all).

Where China has too little in the way of workers’ protection, the US has too much – and that’s the real problem that keeps exporting American jobs overseas.

This is neither Apple’s fault, nor its responsibility. It’s up to the American government, and Americans in general, to change that, for example, by starting to tell unions “NO!” every time they attempt their usual blackmail tactics again.