Daily Archives: May 11, 2017

Some men, when they retire, take up fishing, others golf. Not I. Perhaps decades of watching deer romp through my garden subliminally planted the notion. Or binge-watching The Rifleman reruns on Saturday mornings. Whatever the reason, I surprised my 64-year-old liberal self recently when I realized I wanted to try a new pastime: shooting.

I learned something quickly: There are not many left-of-center gun owners. The connection between guns, God and conservatism remains a bit of a mystery to me, and as I found at my first NRA convention balancing on only one leg of that triad can be stressful.

What better place to shop for your first rifle than among the 15 acres of guns and materiel that recently occupied a corner of downtown Atlanta for three days? I know the NRAs reputation, but I went to the convention with an open mind, prepared to have my stereotypical notions challenged, and hoping to connect with gun owners who feel, as I do, that its high time the organization returned to its roots as a group promoting gun safety, training and responsible ownership. Id heard, encouragingly, that 90% of NRA members support universal background checks.

Indeed, the attendees were a more diverse group than Id expected, with the notable exception of race. Amid the three Bs beards, baseball caps and bellies there were cute elderly couples walking the exhibit floor hand in hand; mother/daughter pairs; even entire families. I met a teacher from Indiana pulling her young son in a small wagon through the cavernous exhibit hall.

As we chatted, I asked how she related, as both a teacher and a mother of a young boy, to the recent San Bernardino school shooting, where a teacher and an 8-year boy were shot to death.

I understand, in schools, when your child is killed by someone who shoots, I understand that can be heartbreaking. But we are legal gun owners, were the ones who make the right choices.

As for protecting the innocent from those who dont? I think somebody in the school shouldve been armed and able to protect themselves, she said.

Another conventioneer scoffed at background checks. Even to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill? Whos to say whos mentally ill? This was a tough crowd.

Looks can be deceiving. No matter their age, gender or social class, every person I spoke with regurgitated the same NRA talking points: self-defense, guns-dont-kill/people-kill, and 2nd Amendment rights. Three of the sweetest little old ladies from Georgia youd ever want to meet explained that, as widows, they often drive alone on country roads. What if my car breaks down? one asked rhetorically? I need to be able to defend myself.

Is being attacked in your car a common event in rural Georgia? I asked.

Well, not as much as where youre from, Im sure, she said, not actually knowing where I was from, but pegging me for a city slicker. The women didnt believe me when I told them that, to my knowledge, such a crime was virtually unknown where I lived.

One common thread among the conventioneers I met was fear. Real, genuine fear. But thats no accident. Protecting yourself from crime, real and imagined, is what the NRA is all about. The NRAs America, unrecognizable to the vast majority of Americans except from television, is a very dangerous place. Lawlessness, crime and violence reign. Rioters rule the streets. Islamic terrorists are coming to your town. Unarmed women are rape bait. Unarmed men are cowards. It is twilight in America and no one is going to defend you. Except you.

At seminars I was told not to expose my home address on luggage tags, to set up a safe room in my house, to make sure my holstered weapon is so comfortable that that I never leave home without it, even to go out for milk, and to cover all accessible windows with bulletproof film. I learned that the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre was the fault of the school itself and the lyin dirtbag media.

Needing some air, I walked a few blocks downtown to observe a small rally held by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense. Flanked by mothers holding photographs of their children killed by guns, Stephanie Stone, an African American woman from Atlanta, spoke movingly of the death five years ago of her 14-year-old son, shot three times in the head during a home intrusion robbery. Wait a second I had just seen a scary NRA video based on this very scenario! Except, of course, in the NRA version the lesson is that fewer gun restrictions, not more, would have prevented this horror. Afterwards, I expressed my condolences and asked Stone how she felt about the NRA essentially appropriating her tragic story for their own, opposite purposes.

I expected I wanted her to express the outrage that I felt, but I received no such satisfaction. She noted that several of the moms were gun owners themselves, and explained, Were just for some common-sense things such as waiting periods, universal background checks, an end to pawnshop sales. We have to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people.

Thinking about our conversation in full gun thefts in her neighborhood, the 18-year-old neighbor who recently bought an AK-47 I understood one reason for her surprisingly tempered response: The moms holding photographs of their slain children were likely the only people Id met all weekend who actually did live anywhere that even remotely resembled the NRAs dangerous America, and could legitimately view a gun in the home as a necessary protection.

The great, tragic irony is that the NRA, in supposedly solving a crisis that overwhelmingly doesnt exist for its members, is in fact contributing to the very real crises of inner-city gun violence that mothers like Stephanie Stone face every day.

I returned home with a new question: Can one be a responsible, guiltless gun owner who keeps up his skills at the range, or does the mere act of joining the gun culture and economy, of bringing another weapon or two off the assembly line, make me complicit?

Perhaps golfs a better hobby, after all.

William Alexander is working on a book about his indoctrination into Americas gun culture. His last piece for the Los Angeles Times was on correctly using vous and tu.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion or Facebook

The rest is here:

What happened when a 64-year-old liberal attended his first NRA convention - Los Angeles Times

When you consult books about Liberal and Liberal Democrat party history about the birth of our Internationalism, European Federalism and our thesis that stand-alone nationstates (and narrow nationalism) become more and more obsolete, you discover a surprising fact.

According to Michael Steeds chapter Liberal Tradition in Don MacIvers bundle The Liberal Democrats (from 1996), it was in the comprehensive policy survey The Liberal Way of 1934, that we stated that in future, narrow nationalist parties everywhere would face parties, the Liberals firmly among them, supporting the growing, factual interdependence as best policy basis. Philip Kerr, marquis of Lothian, said (1935): the only final remedy for war is a federation of nations. But personal guilt about having himself written the War Damages clause in the Versailles Treaty made Kerr become an advocate of appeasement to Germany, a Liberal dissident, until the Munich Agreement.

Both Chris Cooks history of the Liberals in 1900-76, and Robert Ingham & Duncan Bracks authoritative bundle Peace Reform & Liberation (PRL; 2001) tell that this interdependence makes collectivism better policy-idea was formulated in a phase of disintegration of the Liberal party (the split about the 1931 National Government; desertions to the National Liberals and Labour; loss of seats).

Sir Archibald Sinclair, who became party leader after the heavy 1935 election defeat, put our internationalism to immediate use, insisting on collective security and collective deal-making (as opposed to selective powernation deals like Munich), Reynolds & Hunter write in their chapter about 1929-55 in PRL (p. 222). Instead of Appeasement, Sinclair insisted on collective resistance to expansionist dictatorships, while Tory dissident Churchill pointed to Germanys rearmament.

Steed (in MacIver, Lib Dems, p. 56) says that the Liberals support for Federalism in Europe (Federal Union from 1938/9; European movement from 48), and Clement Davies early support for the federally structured ECSC of Robert Schuman, all derive directly from the Liberal Way stance. And from there it is a small step to the full-blown support for (and wanting to join in) the EEC by Grimond, Thorpe and later leaders.

Sinclair is the man who combined Liberal international collectivism with pleas for restoring a strong defense (saying other states should do the same, while joining the collective). The Sudeten crisis and Munich were roundly condemned by Sinclair (joined by Churchill); instead of asking the Benelux countries to join in (where the Social Liberal Dutch VDB was also pleading rearmament), Chamberlain only brought wavering France to Munich, where they amputated the also excluded democracy Czechoslovakia.

Both the thinking of The Liberal Way, and the pleas by both Sinclairs Liberals and the Dutch VDB for rearmament from 1935 onward are a precedent for the thinking of LibDems and D66 in these days. The 2009 and 2014 Euro-election victories by D66 in a Netherlands turning Eurosceptic shows that it may be an uphill struggle, but distinctiveness wins.

* Bernard Aris is a Dutch historian (university of Leiden), and Documentation assistant to the D66 parliamentary Party. He is a member of the Brussels/EU branch of the LibDems.

Read this article:

Our Liberal Internationalism, born in a period of party fragmentation, is now our uniting and unique selling point - Liberal Democrat Voice

Liberal Democratic party senator David Leyonhjelm accepted $55,000 in donations from tobacco company Philip Morris. Two tobacco control experts have complained about the logo his party used during the 2016 election campaign. Photograph: Sam Mooy/AAP

The logo used by David Leyonhjelms Liberal Democratic party at the 2016 election failed to meet the Australian Electoral Commissions guidelines and should not have been approved, a review of the decision has found.

The logo, used during the 2016 election campaign, shows the word Liberal in large, bolded capital letters, with the word Democrat in smaller, unbolded letters.

Complaints were made about the logo to the commission in May 2016, but the Australian Electoral Commission found there was insufficient evidence to determine the logo should be refused.

But in June two eminent tobacco control experts and professors of public health, Mike Daube from Curtin University and Simon Chapman from the University of Sydney, called on the commission to review its decision. The professors are interested in Leyonhjelm in part because of his acceptance of $55,000 in donations from big tobacco company Philip Morris.

In their complaint Daube and Chapman asserted that the new logo was deliberately designed to mislead voters and to suggest a relationship or connection to the Liberal party.

But the commission said their decision that the logo was acceptable stood, in part because the reasons why a party chooses a certain logo design, or why a party chooses to change that design, are not relevant for the purposes of assessing a proposed logo under part XI of the Electoral Act.

However, on Thursday the commission sent a document to Daube and Chapman, which has been seen by Guardian Australia, which said a further review of the decision had led them to refuse to enter the Liberal Democratic party logo into the register.

In the opinion of the Electoral Commission the font and prominence of the word Liberal so nearly resembles the Liberal party of Australias logo as it appears on the ballot paper, such that a reasonable person is likely to confuse or mistake the Liberal Democratic party logo for the logo of the Liberal party of Australia.

In its statement of reasons the commission said it had decided to set aside the decision under review.

A media officer with the commission told Guardian Australia it meant that the previous decision to include the logo in the register had been revoked and that the logo would be removed from the register. However it is unclear what the implications of this are given the election was held in August and the logo has already been used.

If this logo has worked to cause a significant number of people to vote for him this is of immense interest and it certainly should be of interest to the Australian parliament, Chapman said.

However, it is a shame that it took the commission about eight months to come up with this finding.

Daube said it raises all kinds of questions about what this means for the election result if he was elected partly on the basis of a dodgy logo.

The decision follows controversy over the name of the party in the 2013 election, when the Liberal Democrats drew first place on the NSW ballot paper. In what has been labelled a fluke, the size of the ballot paper columns saw the name Liberal Democrats split across two lines, and election analysts said voters may have placed a 1next to the Liberal Democrats believing they were voting Liberal. The party won 50 times the vote it received in 2007, before its previous name of the Liberty and Democracy party was scrapped.

A spokesman for Leyonhjelm said the Senator was aware of the finding, but was not immediately available for comment.

More here:

Liberal Democratic party logo failed to meet AEC guidelines - The Guardian

The Liberal Democrats will earmark 1bn in the partys manifesto to tackle the historic injustice faced by people with mental ill health in an effort to cut waiting times and reduce the number of suicides, the partys health spokesperson has announced.

It comes after Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, revealed last week his party, if elected, would inject 6bn into health and social care services by increasing income tax by a penny for every worker.

In an attempt to rescue the NHS and social care the party will ring-fence 1bn of this fund for mental health services with a particular concentration on improving waiting times for young people and pregnant women suffering from mental ill health.

Norman Lamb, the partys health spokesperson, said the Lib Dems are committed to ending the historic injustice against people with mental ill health in Britain. Under the Conservative Government, services have been stretched to breaking point at a time when the prevalence of mental ill health appears to be rising, he said.

He continued: Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have outlined how thy will fund mental health services. Weve made it clear that our priorities will be funded from our ambitious plan to inject 6bn a year into the NHS with an additional penny on income tax.

We will invest in improving waiting time standards for mental health care in the NHS, end the scandalous use of force against people with mental ill health and prioritise the national action to dramatically reduce the number of people who take their own lives.

The announcement comes after Ms May pledged an extra 10,000 staff to work in NHS mental services but failed to elaborate on how the positions will be funded. On my first day in Downing Street last July, I described shortfalls in mental health services as one of the burning injustices in our country, Ms May said.

It is abundantly clear to me that the discriminatory use of a law passed more than three decades ago is a key part of the reason for this.

So today I am pledging to rip up the 1983 Act and introduce in its place a new law which finally confronts the discrimination and unnecessary detention that takes place too often.

See original here:

Liberal Democrats earmark 1bn to fight 'historic injustice' faced by people with mental ill health - The Independent

As the Ontario government prepares to unveil legislation completing its 25 per cent hydro rate cut, the Progressive Conservatives have obtained leaked cabinet documents that suggest electricity prices will go up dramatically after four years. ( Dave Chidley / THE CANADIAN PRESS )

The average hydro bill will jump almost $10 a month in 2022 and soar to $195 by 2027 under the Liberal governments hydro plan, according to a leaked cabinet document obtained by the Progressive Conservatives.

It was provided to the Star as Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault prepares to unveil legislation Thursday to enact a promised 25 per cent cut to skyrocketing electricity costs, keeping increases to 2 per cent annually until 2021.

But thats when the breathing room for ratepayers ends for the better part of a decade, suggests the document.

Average monthly bills will rise 6.5 per cent a year from 2022 to 2027 and are forecast to jump 10.5 per cent the year after when they will hit $195. Thats up from $123 this year with the promised cut, lowering bills from an average $158 in 2016.

Rate increases, however, are minimal after 2028, falling slightly the next year and hovering around the 1 per cent mark from there until they are projected to fall 9.3 per cent in 2048, when the average monthly bill is expected to be $210.

Conservative sources say they obtained the information, called Global Adjustment (GA) Smoothing with the subtitle Confidential Cabinet Document from a whistleblower after Thibeaults rate cut plan was presented to cabinet in early March. There is no date on the document, which has not been verified by the government.

Conservatives charged Thursday that the Liberal plan is all about boosting the Liberals re-election chances in the June 2018 provincial election as Premier Kathleen Wynne struggles in the polls.

Thibeault maintained the Liberal plan is the best option for Ontarians, who have seen hydro bills double in the last decade as the electricity system was upgraded to become more reliable and phase out heavily polluting coal-fired generation stations.

Were worrying about families now. Were worried about small businesses now, Thibeault said in the Legislature as he was peppered with questions by the Conservatives.

The minister, who took over the portfolio last June, slammed PC Leader Patrick Brown for stalling the release of his own plan for hydro rates.

Whats the position of the official opposition when it comes to their plan? Thibeault said, noting it has been 70 days since Brown said he would reveal one soon.

Were still waiting for anything credible.

The Conservatives are holding a policy convention in Toronto in November.

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath revealed her hydro policy, which she said would result in rate cuts of up to 30 per cent, several days before the government came out with its 25 per cent plan.

Under the government scheme, 8 per cent came off hydro bills on January 1 with instant rebates of the provincial portion of the HST, with another 17 per cent to come this summer.

That will cost an extra $25 billion in interest charges over the next 30 years, by amortizing the costs of recent electricity system improvements over a longer period of time.

Premier Kathleen Wynne has compared that to a homeowner extending a mortgage term to get lower monthly payments.

The cabinet document also shows financing for the global adjustment portion of hydro bills which covers the fixed costs of running Ontarios power generation fleet and conservation programs structured to fall sharply for the next nine years then reverse to sharp jumps of over 20 per cent from 2028 to 2047.

Conservatives said that amounts to a comeback of the controversial hydro debt retirement charge eliminated in the last couple of years.

The Toronto Star and thestar.com, each property of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, One Yonge Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5E1E6. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please contact us or see our privacy policy for more information.

See more here:

Electricity prices to soar after four years, says secret Liberal cabinet document - Toronto Star

A few stray election observations.

Be honest, after Tuesdays nail-biting drama, didnt you expect the Oilers game seven to go into quadruple overtime?

The Liberals entered the campaign with high hopes of regaining lost ground on Vancouver Island.

They really didnt want a repeat of 2013, when they were reduced to just two of the 14Island seats and were shut out of Greater Victoria, leaving the capital without a government MLA for the first time since 1952. They even tried luring voters back with an Island-specific platform.

The result? The greatest flop since The Adventures of Pluto Nash. Michelle Stilwell hung onto Parksville-Qualicum, but that was all the Liberals got. Their other seat, Courtenay-Comox, went NewDemocrat (at least for now; the spread was only nine votes).

> More election news at timescolonist.com/bcelection

Why did the Island platform fail? Because when you have been in a rocky relationship for 16years, Baby, I can change promises ring hollow. It smacked of opportunism when the Liberals dangled a B.C. Ferries frequent user/loyalty program in front of the same people who have been force-fed big fare increases since the Gordon Campbell days.

The NDP had mixed results in races where its gender-equity policy applied. Party rules say that in ridings where an incumbent female New Democrat MLA doesnt run again, the new candidate must also be female. The NDP went 4-for-4 in such circumstances Tuesday. The rules also say the candidates replacing retiring male MLAs must either be female or a member of an equity-seeking group. The NDP went 0-for-3 in such races Tuesday.

That included Cowichan Valley, where the local party president, claiming discrimination, stomped off and ran as an independent after the contentious policy prevented him from replacing retiring MLA Bill Routley. The NDP also lost in Columbia-Revelstoke, where their candidate, after being challenged to justify his nomination, revealed himself as bisexual, something he had hoped to keep private. In Skeena, a white man who argued his hearing impairment fit the NDP policy lost to a Liberal who happened to be aboriginal.

How diverse are Vancouver Islands MLAs? Seven are male and seven female, an increase of two women from 2013 (though that would change to eight and six if the results flip in Courtenay-Comox).

Two Island MLAs, Mtis Carole James and the Tsartlip-raised Adam Olsen, have aboriginal heritage. Liberal Dallas Smith, former president of the Nanwakolas Council, was defeated in Vancouver Island North.

Conventional wisdom said any Green gains in the popular vote would come at the expense of the NDP. New Democrats groused that by splitting their votes, the Greens would allow the Liberals to hold power. Greens replied that they were just as likely to draw support from those who had backed the Liberals in past votes.

On the Island, at least, it appears the latter argument was right. The CBCs Metchosin-raised data-mining wizard Tara Carman found the Liberals lost 4.1 per cent of the popular vote here relative to 2013, while the NDP lost 3.5. The Greens gained 9.3.

That nine-vote split in Courtenay-Comox might be post-Christmas-trousers tight (there are strata council votes with wider spreads), but its not the closest race in B.C. history. In 1979, New Democrat Al (Landslide) Passarell beat Socred MLA Frank Calder 750 to 749 in a two-horse race in Atlin. Word was that Calder and his wife didnt bother travelling from Victoria to their northern riding to vote.

Can anyone explain why the Greens dont play Gary Wrights Dream Weaver whenever leader Andrew Weaver enters party functions? Great swaying-crowd potential. Just saying.

Read more:

Jack Knox: Liberal flub, Island diversity and Dream Weaver - Times Colonist