The Black Rod

Like most lawbreakers, Greg Selinger, Stan Struthers and Theresa Oswald think they're smarter than everyone else. In their arrogance, they're convinced the law doesn't apply to them. They can always rely on their apologists to run interference for them, whether it's Winnipeg Free Press columnist Dan Lett, inventing excuses for why the NDP needs to break the law, or Legislature reporter Bruce Owen, musing over whether breaking the law is wrong if government members do it. Make no mistake, the Premier of the province, Greg Selinger, has broken the law. He`s done it blatantly in the belief that nobody can do anything about it. He`s declared that he and the NDP are above the laws of Manitoba. But the law is clear: C.C.S.M. c. B5 The Balanced Budget, Fiscal Management and Taxpayer Accountability Act PART 2 TAX REFERENDUM REQUIREMENT Referendum required for tax changes 10(1) Subject to subsection (2), the government shall not present t

Well, well, well.  What had we here? It was the official disclosure of how Winnipeg city councillors spent your money over the first two months of 2013.  Of course, the first thing we did was grab a yellow marker and start highlighting those expenditures that didn't look like they were necessary to run a political office.  The second thing we did was this blog. Councillors not only get their salaries, but an allowance to run their offices, an allowance that's used as often as not as the councillors' personal public piggy bank. Did you know you're paying Blue Cross premiums for seven councillors?  In two months, January and February, Harvey Smith has dinged taxpayers for $840.75 in Blue Cross premiums. That's a shade more than the $829  billed by Mike Pagtakhan and $827 you paid for John Orlikow.  Devi Sharma, Ross Eadie, Jeff Browaty and Grant Nordman also have you covering their private health care to lesser amounts. Public Transit?  Wh

The Canadian Museum for Human Rights is in the market for a new lie to replace the old lie they were using to justify a stand-alone gallery on the Holocaust and their potpourri approach to other genocides. You remember how Gail Asper and her champions were going around lecturing everybody how the study of the Holocaust and of human rights in the modern world are synonymous, with one leading directly to the other, and without one there wouldn't be the other? Here's how Gail Asper summarized the argument in Maclean's magazine: In conversation: Gail Asper By Jonathon Gatehouse - Wednesday, March 23, 2011 Q: The Ukrainian-Canadian Civil Liberties Association has charged that one horror—the Holocaust—is being “elevated” above all others at the museum. What’s your response? A: ... All the experts agree that no human rights museum could ever be established without a full examination of the Holocaust. It was fundamental to our notion

We were reading the weekend newspaper and having a good laugh when--bam--- we realized we weren't reading the Saturday Funnies, we were reading a special supplement on Treaties. How were we to know?  They're both equally nonsensical, illogical and downright laughable. The supplement was called Our Past Our Future and was apparently put out by the Treaty Relations Commission of Manitoba. a "neutral body" with the mandate of encouraging discussion and facilitating public understanding of Treaties.  Or, in layman's terms, government propaganda. Apparently the way to start a discussion about Treaties, given you only have 32 pages to play with, is NOT to print the treaties that apply in Manitoba.  That's a real kneeslapper.  You might even think  that's a deliberate attempt to keep people from reading for themselves what's in the treaties.  Isn't that a laugh? The next step is to rewrite history.  That's always fun, isn't it? What i