Who will win: Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin?

The 2008 “sprint” for the Presidency in the United States has begun. Well kind of… The only major candidate that hasn’t been officially nominated yet is Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona.

Anyways, the question on everyone’s mind is: Will Obama or will McCain win the election?

In my opinion, John McCain will win.

The main rationale for my choice is not due to my membership in the Ontario PC Party, or the fact that I support the federal Conservatives. Instead, my choice is based on a few things that I have seen from the McCain Campaign and from John McCain himself.

If you have been following McCain’s recent political career, he has been normally perceived as an underdog, the one not favoured to win. And yet, he often overcomes the odds. Exemples of such is the 2008 Republican Primary season. McCain actually started out at the bottom and his campaign was seen as “dead in the water” early on in the race to become the Republican Nominee. Now look where he is now: the Presumptive Nominee of the Republican Party for the President of the United States.

The style in which McCain speaks to the people is also a factor in why if I could vote in an American election I would vote for him.

McCain, although a bit slow compared to Obama, is good at giving straight forward and concise answers and statements, when taking about his positions, his policies, and his platform. He also knows how to connect with the people through his stories and his experiences. This was shown during his conversation with Pastor Rick Warren on the Saddleback Civil Forum.

McCain has also proved himself to be a leader in bi-partisan political collaboration. He has worked with many Democrat/Independent Democrat-caucusing senators on different legislations throughout his senate career, and has sometimes vote against party lines. As a result, he is known to have an “Independent-streak” and nicknamed by others as the “Maverick Republican Senator from Arizona”.

The leadership in bi-partisan political collaboration will allow a McCain Administration to be an effective presidency.

Another factor in why I made my choice and why McCain will win is due to the fact that he chose Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate.

So who is Gov. Sarah Palin? And how is she going to help McCain win the presidency:

1. She is a woman (obviously). A brillant tactic by McCain, in an attampt to woo any anti-Obama Hillary Dems out there. (Last I heard it was somewhere between 15% to 25% of the dems, I could be wrong on the figures though).
2. In Alaska (according to CTV, and possibly McCain), Palin is known as a corruption fighter, and known to stand up to powerful oil interests. This will give the message that a McCain Administration will clean up the corruption in Government and that his decisions will not influenced by big oil companies such as ExxonMobile.
3. In Alaska, she has an 80% approval rating.

And that is why, I predict that McCain will win the 2008 United States Presidential Election.

on the Gardiner Expressway

The Toronto City Council voted on July 14, 2008 to approve an environmental assessment in regards to a proposal to take down a part of the Gardiner Expressway, from the Don Valley Parkway to Jarvis.

Any proposal to take down the Gardiner Expressway is a bad and stupid idea.

What the mayor and the anti-Gardiner councillors doesn’t realize is that we are built as an auto city. As a North American city, it was expected that each city across this continent become an auto city.

I understand why the mayor and several councillors wish for this city to become a “Transit City” and why they wish to promote alternative modes of transportation, however, the massive and quick changes proposed by this group of people will hurt the city economically and environmentally.

Why would taking down the Gardiner hurt the city?

By taking down the section between the DVP and Jarvis, they are essentially removing the busiest part of the entire expressway. On a average workday (i.e. the weekdays), thousands upon thousands of vehicles are travelling on the Gardiner. During rush hour, traffic jams are a “natural” occurrence. This goes for the same section on Lakeshore Blvd, which is essentially the same road, but runs directly underneath the elevated expressway. Now wonder if both traffics are combined. The magnitude of such a traffic jam would be great, and vehicles would be stuck there longer than if both the Gardiner and Lakeshore were operational. The longer vehicles are suck in one place, the more idling there will be, and the more pollution and greenhouse gases there will be. As such, this will hurt the environment and reduce the air quality in Toronto and cause more smog.

Businesses, small and large, in the downtown area will also lose out if the Gardiner is taken down. As stated before, it would take people longer to get to work due to the possible and most probable massive traffic congestion. This will result in a later start in the work day, and as most offices close at 4-5, a short work day, and therefore, a loss in revenue. As such, removing the Gardiner will hurt the City’s economy.

McCain or Obama? Post-Saddleback

Just this Saturday, my uncle and I watched the Saddleback Church forum on CNN, where Pastor Rick Warren, pastor of Saadleback Church in California, asked questions to the two presumtive Presidential nominees from the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.

It was an interesting tv program as never in my life, have I seen a Church (and not a parachurch organization or a non-Church Christian organization) become so involved in politics, and on National Television (as in American National TV) as well.

It was also interesting as the questions asked weren’t those usually asked (both Obama and McCain were asked the same questions), i.e. “what’s your favourite sermon?” or “what was your favorite sunday school lesson?”, but “what is your greatest moral failure?”, “what is your position on/definition of marriage”, “what does your faith mean to you?”, or other questions about policies and other positions that they might have.

Watching this program, I was suprised as this wasn’t the usual preverted American political program where the moderator would be lobsided, completely bias, and just full of bs, but the style of questions and discussion was very close (with exception of the large audience) to how Steve Paiken hosts his show: unbiased, neutral, helpful commentary, questions and discussion.

Overall, I was very pleased how the program played out.

Now, to put the spotlight on the Candidates:

I found that Obama was here and there while he was answering questions from Rick Warren, but didn’t really connect with or focus on the audience, either in the Church auditorium or for those watching on television.

He was being his usual self: a very good orator, confident, and has good ideas.

Now, John McCain on the other hand, was being really straight forward, and the fact that he told stories, stories about his past, stories about his ordeal in Vietnam during his captivity, it help him connect with the people. As well, he focus more on and addressed the audience when the questions were being asked by Rick Warren, as opposed to Obama focusing on Warren.

In my opinion, although Obama did well and he did get his message across, McCain certainly “won” in the sense that he connected with the people and focused his attention on them.

And that was the key, in who came out of this forum as the better candidate.

(note: each candidate was asked the same set of Questions but Obama was “interviewed” first and McCain came on the stage as Obama was leaving)

on the idea of a North American Union

If someone were to ask me if Canada and the United States should become one country, my answer would be “No”.

In my opinion, the idea of a North American Union is ill advised, and will not work. As well, such a union will be at our disadvantage.

A non-profit organization called “United North America” (definitely an American organization or a bunch of “Yankee-lovin’” Canadians – no offence) is “dedicated to the democratic unification of Canada and the United States of America into one nation, under the protections, freedoms and privileges of the United States Constitution.“

In my opinion, Canadians don’t need the “protections, freedoms, and privileges of the United States Constitution” and we definitely don’t need the so called “democratic unification” with the United States.

The four points that “United North America” uses in their arguments for a union between Canada and the United States (or as they put it in their website header: uniting our continent democratically by helping Canada’s provinces join the U.S.A) are:

1. Economics
2. Defense
3. Politics
4. History and Culture

Economics

If the economies of Canada and the United States were to combined into one economy, that economy would be the largest in the world. That is one of the arguments made by “United North America“. Although that may sound good, in the long run, it will be disastrous for the Canadian economy.

The United States national debt is over 9 trillion dollars (and growing), while the Canadian national debt is only 500 million dollars (and it’s going down each year). The Americans have made little to no attempt to pay down their debt, while the Federal Governments in Ottawa have been making regular payments to pay off the debt. If Canada were to form a union with the United States, wouldn’t we be also liable for 9 trillion dollars? Of course we would be! This amount of debt is unsustainable and is completely irresponsible on the part of the US Administrations past and present. The massive amount of debt will be one of the factors in the downfall and probably collapse of the American economy.

Even if a combined economy would be the largest in the world, the current situation with the American economy is not that great. Due to decisions that resulted in short term prosperity, the long term effect of those decisions are causing problems for the American people, such as job losses, lower USD value, and the rising prices of goods and services (i.e. stagflation)

“United North America” also makes the claim that tax cuts and lowing trade restrictions would increase the revenue of the Governments both here and across the border. As a Progressive Conservative, I agree that tax cuts are a good thing and that it would encourage people to spend money, thereby increasing Government revenue. However, tax cuts and lower trade restrictions are not always the key to economic success and increased Government revenue. There always needs to be a mix of tax cuts and increases to allow for Government spending on many of our essential programs and policies.

If one closely looks at the arguments that “United North America” make, one would be able to understand that the points made by “United North America” are only half the truth.

National Defence

“United North America” states that “North American air, space and sea are already under the aegis of NORAD, a permanent agreement binding the security of Canada and the United States together domestically“. Although that is true and that both countries do co-operate militarily on different levels and in different organizations, the Canadian military will never be integrated into any other force. Recent history shows that the Canadian Military, as well as the Canadian people, have worked hard to create a separate identity from Britain, and we would continue to maintain a separate identity from that of the United States. The actions and the policies of the Canadian Government have shown time and time again that we will not take orders from the United States. The Vietnam War and the Iraq War are both examples of where the Canadian Government has refused to send an expeditionary force and fight. The wars that Canadians have often chosen to fight in are situations where the need for liberation, peace, and/or order is required, or essential and urgent: The First and Second World Wars (Germans were the aggressors on the Western Front and Canada chose to fight to liberate those countries that were under the occupation of the German military); the Korean War (North Korea pursued an aggressive offensive against South Korea and plus it was a UN approve mission); the Persian Gulf War (Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait); and the War in Afghanistan (essential fulfilling our commitment as set out by Article 5 of the NATO Charter in response to 9/11, as well as helping the Afghan people with education, health care, and security).

A major reason why we do not need such a large military is because we haven’t pissed off anyone like the United States has. Canada has tended to straddle along the middle line in international affairs playing both the ally and the counter balance to the United States.

Politics

Westminster or Presidential-Congressional? Take your pick.

For myself, I would choose Westminster over Presidential-Congressional system any day.

When comparing the Canadian Cabinet with the American Cabinet, one can see that most of the members of the Canadian Cabinet are legislators and all, with exception of the senators (which is like one or two out of 20 to 30 cabinet members), are elected. Every member of the US Cabinet, with exception of the President and the Vice, are appointed. As a result, Canadians have more say in day-to-day affairs than the average American will ever have.

“United North America” makes the claim that Canada was “helpless” during the softwood lumber dispute. That claim is laughable as clearly Canada always came out of a fight with a deal in our favour. (i.e. the 5 billion dollars worth of tariffs was returned by the United States Government to Canadians)

“United North America” miscalculates how much the Canadian Monarchy actually plays in our politics and assumes that we would just accept republicanism just like that. The Monarchy is vital and well integrated part of our political system, as all legislation, law enforcement, diplomacy is carried out in the name of the Canada Monarchy.

In the end, we absolute don’t need a political union with the United States and we certainly don’t need to send Canadian congressmen to Washington DC.

History and Culture

Our history is not the same as the United States. We might shared some areas, but that is not the same as a “…shared history and culture…”.

Canada’s history begins with Cartier, Champlain, la Nouvelle France and our first nations. US History begins with the Puritans and the Mayflower.

The method in which each country became independent of Britain was also different. The United States gained their independence through warfare and bloodshed, while in Canada, we gain our independence through peace, negotiation, and loyalty to the Monarchy.

Canada is de jure bilingual with French and English as our official languages, while the US has no official language but English acts as one.

Our respective societies and our respective methods of dealing with the different ethnic cultures are different: The United State’s immigration attitude is often described as a “melting pot” while Canada is often described as a “mosaic”.

In my opinion, “United North America” is essentially pushing an old idea and an old ideology: Manifest Destiny. It is essentially another word for U.S. expansionism: The idea that the United States is destined to control all of North America. Well, understand this: We will never accept a union with the United States.