Cialis - Buy Cialis Online

Click on the images below to view a larger format. We certify that these images are entirely free of digital enhancement and are exactly as they appeared when our Research Team viewed them.

When we posted an article earlier nicknaming MP Brian Murphy “The Invisible MP,” it was intended as an irreverent, tongue-in-cheek prod at the perception that our MP has done virtually nothing visible in the way of producing results for the people he was elected to represent.

As part of our ongoing research into all things Liberal, our crack Research Team rountinely scours the web for references and quotes. For the past several weeks we have noted a new format at MP Brian Murphy’s website - all photos of Brian are now missing (as is the graphical layout that once adorned Smilin’ Brian’s site).

We are at a loss to explain this prolonged disappearance, but it would be fun to contemplate what has taken place. Some suggest that he is so embarrassed of his party that he no longer wants to be seen in public cloaked in Liberal red. Others thought that perhaps the disappearing act was brought on by a desire to keep a low profile before sneaking out the back door. 

The truth is, it could be a problem with his web host - but that doesn’t explain the antiquated information found in the text portion. Most of the last entries are copies from the Liberal Party of Canada website and when we tried to access his most recent newsletter (July 2007), we received an error message saying “Forbidden.” His “Events” page listed nothing in the foreseeable future, and the “Photos” page contained an admission that Mr. Murphy was seen in Moncton with Stephane Dion - but no picture.

Since all contributors to this blog are constituents, we find it objectionable that our MP has seemingly not properly addressed communication with his subjects (er, constituents). As an elected Member of Parliament, he has a budget for staff and should have no problem keeping his website in working order and up-to-date. We would not begin to suggest that we were “Forbidden” from accessing his newsletter because some nefarious web cookie monster identified us as Conservatives, but these things should really be accessible to the public.

While admittedly having a little fun at our opponents expense, we hope that his staff will correct this problem soon. If recent fundraising woes have caused this deficiency, we would be happy (in the spirit of non-partisanship) to seek volunteers to help MP Murphy correct the problem. Speaking of volunteers, if anyone knows why almost all the spam this blog receives is attached to articles about Brian Murphy, we would appreciate help in back-tracking the source.

“Still reeling from Monday’s humiliating byelection losses, Liberals are turning their attention to another horror story — their dismal fundraising record.” So says typically sympathetic Joan Bryden of the Canadian Press.

She goes on to write: “…the Liberal party, traditionally the most reliant on corporate donations which were banned in 2004, must learn to reap thousands of small donations from grassroots supporters, as the Conservatives do.”

Surely with a new leader they must have seen an up-tick in support from party loyalists, right? “Only 29 per cent of Liberal MPs have donated to the party and almost none of their staff members.” writes Bryden. And “only 5.6 per cent of Liberal party members have donated so far this year to the party”

But they’re doing better right? They are running neck-in-neck with the Conservatives aren’t they? “The Conservative party raised more than twice as much as the Liberals in the second quarter of 2007: $3.8 million versus the Grits’ $1.5 million.”

So what is the plan to reduce this downward spiral of Liberal poverty? “The party will put on a major push this fall to boost donations. Among other things, it will employ former prime minister Jean Chretien and Paul Martin to make e-mail solicitations.” You mean the stars of the sponsorship era? Why not Ignatieff, Rae and Kennedy – the new Liberals?

We can see the pitch to Quebecers now: “Hello, you remember me from the Gomery Inquiry. We need your cash but remember, no brown paper envelopes this time – please! Call now with your donation, and you’ll receive a special edition, small-town-cheap, unity golf ball. (Supplies are limited)”

Or how about this one to Liberal party loyalists: “Hi, it’s Paul. Remember the way I caved to everyone to keep myself in power, then lost the election? How about our failure on the environment and climate change? Well we need your help to put Stéphane and Kyoto before Canadian voters. We lost once and we can do it again with your help.”

The Liberal party’s fundraising is so bad that, earlier this year, our local riding association raised nearly twice what the Liberals raised in Halifax. The Liberal event hosted M. Dion and six of his former leadership rivals; we had one Cabinet Minister. Both fundraisers were held on two weeks notice, and both took place in the typically slow month of July. Once again Stéphane and company just didn’t get it done!

Had the Liberals not been so arrogant about their entitlements for the last decade and a half, we could almost feel sorry for them. As it stands, their demise is just the climax of a 13 year horror story.

Liberal MP Brian Murphy says the federal government should fund 75% of the $68 million restoration cost (or $51 million). One news reader had a great suggestion: Why doesn’t he get his party to pay back the $40 million that is still missing from the Sponsorship Scandal and we’ll put it toward the cost of restoring the Petitcodiac? After all, Premier Graham is only asking for $34 million (a 50/50 split), so the Liberal MP would look like a hero for injecting $40 million in “found money” into the federal coffers.

As tongue-in-cheek as this suggestion might be, it couldn’t be any worse than his leader (M.Dion) hinting that Adscam figures should be allowed back into the Liberal party. “We can’t sideline people who make mistakes forever,” Dion told the Quebec newspaper Le Soleil. It just seems like the Liberals are always standing up for the wrong people. Whether it’s voting against tougher crime legislation or consulting with lawyers for an accused terrorist, Dion and the Liberals seem to think that those who flaunt the law deserve a champion more than those who abide by it. Those in Quebec who were most impacted by the Sponsorship Scandal sent the Liberals a clear message last Monday. The rest of Canada is slowly realizing that the Liberals just don’t want to serve out their time in the penalty box.

Some pundits said that it was over the top for the Conservatives to capitalize on the perception that Stephane Dion is a weak leader. It’s as if it was impolite to point out that your opponent is not prepared to lead the country. When the Conservatives launched a website (notaleader.ca) they cried foul and called the accompanying TV ads, “attack ads.”

All of that has been proven wrong now by a source at the highest levels of the Dion camp - the Opposition leader himself. In an interview with Céline Galipeau of Radio-Canada, M. Dion said the following:

“I’ve never done an interview like we’re doing at the moment,”

“A leader has to put himself out there and I didn’t do it.”

“I’ve always focused on the stakes … but I’ve never put myself on the line and I understand now that a leader must do that.… A leader has to put himself out there and I didn’t do it,”

Part of the problem, he confided, was that he was too low-profile, didn’t know how to communicate his party’s message and didn’t defend himself against critics.

He believes people don’t understand him or his goals.

“I have to have that conversation with all Quebecers so that they understand what I can do if I become prime minister. Up until now I haven’t been able to do that.… I’m not what I seem to be.”

One can almost hear echoes of his rival, Mr. Ignatieff’s, statement: “Stephane, you just didn’t get it done.”

That is the point that the Conservatives have been trying to make to Canadians for the last 10 months since M. Dion became leader of the Liberal party. If he can’t get it done on the environment, if he can’t get it done for the Liberal party - how can he possibly get it done for the country of Canada? With the Russians threatening our Arctic sovereignty, the Middle East coming to a boiling point, Canada needing to play catch-up on the Environment after 13 years of Liberal neglect - WE NEED A LEADER!

Stephen Harper has demonstrated an ability to position Canada as a sovereign and independent force for democracy in the world. While standing with our NATO allies in Afghanistan, he has made it clear that Canada will blaze its own trail in bilateral trade with Latin America. At the same time, he succeeded in getting countries like China, India and the United States to agree that they need to participate in combatting climate change. Once again we have become a Canada which is strong and united, despite the colours and cultures that make up the mosaic of our country.

As Quebecers hinted by giving the Conservatives 37% of the popular vote in their by-elections, Canadians are increasingly coming to realize that Stephen Harper is the leader for this generation. They did not just reject a Liberal party tainted by scandal, they rejected the leadership of Stephane Dion with an emphatic “No.”

The link below is from the Canadian Armed Forces and will allow you to view a video of the great work our men and women in uniform are doing in Afghanistan. Our troops are there to ensure that Afghan children have the same rights and privileges that we have, and to ensure that they don’t grow up to be suicide bombers under the Taliban.

See the Canadian Armed Forces in action

NB Premier, Shawn Graham’s telling responses to some straightforward questions about trust and personal popularity.

Watch the interview from CBC’s website here. (Note: You will need Real Media player)

Perusing the commentary after Monday’s by-elections in Quebec, we find increasing speculation that an election MAY be coming this fall.

From Chantal Hebert in the Toronto Star we read: “the Bloc Québécois is losing its purpose and the federal Liberal party – as it is currently led – its relevance.” And “that means that the odds that the Bloc will support next month’s Speech from the Throne have now become longer.” “As a result, today the Liberal leader and his party are about as relevant to the political life of Quebec as Cold War warriors after the fall of the Berlin wall.”

From Alexander Panetta of Canadian Press: “New Democrats are gearing up for a possible election, emboldened by Mulcair’s victory in Montreal’s Outremont riding and by a new poll showing them tied with the Liberals in Quebec.” “NDP Leader Jack Layton has already warned that he will likely oppose Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government next month in a confidence vote that could trigger a federal election.”

Here’s a possible scenario:

• The NDP sees a weakened Liberal party, a Green vote that is almost off the radar and increasing federalist support in Quebec. Regardless of what Jack Layton says, he knows he will never form government, but he does crave being the Official Opposition. The opportunity is ripe for the NDP to pick up seats at the expense of the Liberals and, if they can gain momentum, eliminate bleeding off to the Green party.

• The Bloc cannot continue to support the Conservatives. If they do, they no longer have any purpose as “Quebec’s watchdog” in Ottawa. They must do something to justify their existence as they have seen their fortunes continually degraded.

• The Liberals are in disarray. The majority of pundits agree that M. Dion has failed to connect with most of Canada. He is facing a potential mutiny in his own party after having failed to win any of the by-elections. Those who are sharpening the knives may realize that it would be far less acrimonious to “allow Dion to fail again” in a general election, than to have a bitter dispute within the party.

Liberals who want to be rid of Dion win by defeating the government and forcing an election where they can stop the bleeding by cauterizing the head. The Bloc is likely as desperate as it has been since its inception. The NDP can see the city lights of left-leaning seats that have lost confidence in the Liberals.

Both Layton and Dion have said “out of Afghanistan” and “bring back C-30” or they will vote no confidence in the government. While PM Harper is looking for a middle ground which will tell our troops that their government is behind them, there is no way that C-30 will ever see the light of day again. Which leads us to the brink with the question being, “Which of the opposition parties will jump off first?” and “Will enough of them back off to keep the government from falling?”

The fate of the government is in the hands of the opposition. Isn’t it strange how the Paul Martin government maneuvered, bartered and begged to KEEP from going into an election. On the other hand, the Stephen Harper government can’t seem to buy an opportunity to CALL an election because the other parties are too under-funded, under-supported and unsure. This is the same Harper government that was never supposed to be; and then was never supposed to last. Who knew it would be so hard to seek a new mandate?

[Note: Graphic of Election Fever Meter is from nationalnewswatch.com where it is updated daily]

In a 19 September 2007 article in the Times & Transcript, Brian Murphy teams up with the newspaper’s Ottawa reporter to write a front page piece that heavily implies that the nasty Conservatives are ignoring our region and they really don’t care about Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe.

“I would say there are no big electoral gains for him here, so why bother… the prime minister sees no urgency in being a friend to New Brunswick.” Murphy is quoted as saying.

That of course is why the Prime Minister visited Moncton personally just weeks ago to meet with a roundtable of business leaders. That is why Fisheries Minister, Loyola Hearn, detoured from an announcement in Miramichi a few weeks ago to personally visit and review the Petitcodiac River causeway issue.

That is why Public Works minister, Michael Fortier, came to Moncton in July to meet with stakeholders from all three communities in our riding. That is why Parliamentary Secretary, Rob Moore, was in Dieppe in August to announce municipal funding (events by the way which neither Liberal MP’s Brian Murphy nor Dominic LeBlanc bothered to attend!) If the region’s two Liberal MP’s don’t care enough about good news for their constituents to show up at the announcements, they should not be critical in the press behind the Conservatives’ back.

What are the four issues held out as tokens of the Conservatives’ perceived lack of care?

1. The “pressing” need for “money for a city convention centre.” (Despite the fact that the same newspaper has recently published not one, but two, articles claiming that a Convention Centre is probably NOT the right thing for Moncton! Reports indicate plans are already being revised for a smaller Conference Centre.)

2. The “pressing” need for “sports stadium” funding. (From a press release at the time “Prime Minister Harper pledged to allocate $6 million in ACOA funds to help build a proposed stadium if the city’s bid [for the 2008 Track and Field Event] is successful.” Unfortunately, we missed that bid but were successful in bidding for the 2010 event. This funding was confirmed for the 2010 date. “Every year amateur athletes display the Canadian values of hard work, competition, and fair play in communities through this country. The Premier and I believe that Moncton would be the ideal community to showcase these laudable Canadian values to the world,” the Prime Minister said during the announcement)

3. The “pressing” need for “increased customs staff at the Greater Moncton International Airport.” (Minister Stockwell Day has publicly expressed strong support for addressing Moncton airport’s needs. Protocol requires that he can only recommend to the CBSA that Moncton be extended additional services. Also funding has to be allocated by the Treasury Board which cannot happen until the fall 2007 session of Parliament. See note at bottom of this posting.)

4. The “pressing” need for “funding for the restoration of the Petitcodiac River.” (Despite the fact that the Liberals initiated the construction of the causeway, and did nothing to remediate the issue while in power for 13 of the last 14 years! Brian Murphy has been all over the board on funding for this issue, and it requires thoughtful negotiations with the provincial government to insure responsible management of the project. These negotiations are ongoing at present.)

So where is evidence of the Harper government ignoring the needs of this riding? Is it in the millions of dollars the Conservatives have invested in New Brunswick over the last year?

This is simply Brian Murphy’s sour grapes attitude from being part of a party that was devastatingly defeated in three Quebec by-elections. The Conservative party attracted 37% of the popular vote in those elections. More than double the number of people who voted for Brian Murphy’s Liberals, and more than the NDP and Liberal votes combined!

This is one more example of MP Murphy playing the media a tune while pulling the old “Harper doesn’t care” rabbit out of his hat. Sooner or later the public is going to catch on to this sleight of hand.

Note: “‘I understand the importance of addressing this issue, and I have tasked CBSA (Canadian Border Services Agency) officials with advancing this file’ said Minister Day late last week.” (Jesse Robichaud, Times & Transcript, Wednesday March 7th, 2007, page A3) “I have met with representatives from the Moncton area (including mayors and economic development officials) to discuss customs services at the Moncton airport, therefore, I am well aware of the issue. That is why I have tasked my officials at the Canadian Border Services Agency to conduct a Core Services Review to establish a service delivery approach that is fair, transparent and flexible.” (Source)

The best way to discover the perceived tone of a story is to outline its elements, then look to the summary to see what the essential message is. The following is an outline of a story by Kate Wright, the Times & Transcript’s Ottawa reporter. This article was published on 19 September 2007, page A1.

1. Headline – “Metro area ignored by feds?”

2. Introduction – “political leaders [say] … the federal government has seemingly ignored their requests for help.”

3. Source for accusation – Opposition Liberal MP, Brian Murphy.

4. Quotes – “municipalities across the region have become weary of the promises made by the federal government because of the lack of movement on many of these files.”
“the area is receiving the “short end of the stick” from the federal Conservatives and the prime minister sees no urgency in being a friend to New Brunswick.”
“They’re taking old money and making new announcements”
“I would say there are no big electoral gains for him here, so why bother.”

5. Corroboration for Murphy statements – (speculation by political analysts)

a. “political observers say that the federal Tories may be holding back”

b. “many projects may end up on hold”

c. “infrastructure projects may never have been on Harper’s radar.”

d. “Anything beyond that may have been on the chopping block.”

6. Conclusion – “Political leaders” (i.e. a disgruntled Liberal MP whose party faced an embarrassing defeat in Quebec) assert that the Conservative government is ignoring the region. Furthermore, “the prime minister sees no urgency in being a friend to New Brunswick.”

To absolutely validate these accusations, you invite political analysts to speculate on possible motives for withholding funding and then report their musings as solid evidence affirming Murphy’s allegations.

Number of Conservative sources consulted or cited? ZERO Background to validate the information? ZERO Reader conclusion? “It must be true because the paper reported it and quoted people who know more than I do.”

But is it true? Is PM Harper’s government REALLY ignoring New Brunswick and greater Moncton? I guess if millions and millions of dollars of federal investment indicates our region is being ignored, the Conservatives are guilty. Should there have been the most cursory research done into the background, the facts would have quickly leapt to the surface. Here is a partial chronicle of Conservative investment in New Brunswick since March 2006.

At the end of our research on the Petitcodiac River restoration issue, we came across this nugget on MP Brian Murphy’s website (brianfpmurphy.ca). It makes one wonder how he can hope to have credibility when he is so careless in public.

Context: When the EIA was released in 2005, the project estimate (4B) was $54 million. When the 4B option was announced by Roly MacIntyre in August 2007, the cost was $68 million (adjusted for inflation…). That represents an annual increase of $7 million per year, or roughly 10% inflation.

Murphy Press Release 22 September 2006

“Mr. Murphy pointed out that the former Liberal government in Ottawa had offered to fund up to $27 million of the final cost of the project…”

[Here’s the math: Project cost - $68 million; Liberal proposal - $27 million = 40% share of the project cost]

Times and Transcript, 8 August 2007 p. A1

“Brian Murphy, the Liberal Member of Parliament for Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, was somewhat more aggressive in his approach. ‘Three to six months and a 75 per cent federal share,’ the former Moncton mayor flatly told a reporter moments after MacIntyre dismounted the podium.”

[Here’s the new math: Project cost: $68 million; Murphy proposal – 75% = $51 million!]

That is 187% inflation in less than 12 months! How does Mr. Murphy explain this incredible leap? “‘Perhaps that’s a figure that’s been pulled out of the air,’ said Murphy” in the next sentence of the same newspaper article.

Purportedly the Liberal Martin government had “offered” to fund “up to” $27 million of the restoration (try finding that on the books somewhere). Reports indicate that the Graham provincial Liberals are only hitting the feds up for a 50/50 split on the project – or $34 million. Our Liberal MP however thinks that $51 million of our taxpayer dollars should fund an “effort [that] would comprise the single, largest capital works project in Moncton’s history.” (1)

Here’s what Dr. Eugene Niles had to say about that in his report (p.28 of 39): “While many support the notion of restoring the Petitcodiac River and fish passage, they caution that this should not be done at any cost, that limits must be placed on restoration efforts. Some have suggested that available resources could better be spent …rather than on one big project with questionable results.”

Well, what’s a few million here or there when the money belongs to someone else? Although there is little doubt that the river issue needs to be addressed, we agree with Dr. Niles that it must be done responsibly and with prudent stewardship of the public purse.