Atheists tend to be a very skeptical bunch – at least those who participate in online communities, so when an email arrives in my inbox titled “AtheistCensus Mailing List – Action Required” when I never signed up for such a thing, my skeptisense gets tingling.

Thank you for your interest in www.atheistcensus.com. We are reaching out to the world and getting atheists and agnostics on the same page. Please opt in to receive our emails on our progress.
Your address: thzatheist@gmail.com has been subscribed. Click Yes, I want to join! to confirm your subscription. If you did not intend to subscribe, simply ignore this message and your e-mail address will be removed from our records.
You can cancel your subscription or change subscription preferences by clicking the Unsubscribe link at the bottom of any e-mail message we send to you in the future.
Thank you again for joining.
Sincerely,
AtheistCensus

---

This email was sent by AtheistCensus, PO Box 4567, Edmonton, Alberta T6A2Y7 , using Express Email Marketing.
Express Email Marketing has a zero-tolerance spam policy. Please report spam by clicking here

On seeing this, I sent a reply to info@atheistcensus.com – the default reply address – and later to billions@atheistcensus.com – the email listed on their website.

I did not complete your survey and am not ready to be included in your database. Please remove my email and tell me how you obtained it.

Your website mentions "We are committed to 100% transparency," yet you include no names as to who registered your domain, or how you plan to use "90% - funds atheist & agnostic organizations and promotion" without working with existing atheist and humanist organizations that have done decades of legwork on secular issues and community building.

One may even think your website is little more than a religious attempt to simply catalogue as many atheists around the world as possible.

Ian Bushfield

This was 4 days ago, and I have yet to see a single response.

A bit of Googling returns a self-published press release from Lucas Matheson of Edmonton, bragging about the “Official Launch” of Atheistcensus.com as well as a somewhat spammy Twitter account. There is also a blog post by Leo Tarvi that is as equally skeptical as I am about the purpose of this site.

This entire story is quite similar to on from last year where an American pastor made news for calling for a “national registry” of atheists.

I haven’t signed the census for a few reasons:

• The hypocrisy of claiming to be 100% transparent but yet providing no information about who’s running the page
• The claim that 90% of their funds will go to “atheist & agnostic organizations and promotion” lacks any credibility as no one knows this guy, especially when they also claim not to be affiliated with “any external parties”
• There’s no incentive or benefit. With my local groups, I help build an actual community. With blogs, I communicate to others. All this does is give some pseudo-anonymous guy my email address.
• Despite being active in the atheist community in Edmonton for 3+ years, I have never heard of this Lucas Matheson.

Overall, it’s far too sketchy and lacks any effort to actually build a real (online or offline) community. It’s a perhaps novel idea, but otherwise it seems like little more than a marketing gimmick.

What do  you see?

I see the moon, some clouds, a tree, and an over-exposed light post in the foreground.

The Calgary Herald wants to know if you’re as pareidolia-susceptible as their reader L. Wolanski and see Jesus in the clouds.

Nevermind how angry this story about the supermoon will make Phil Plait, if anything the face in the clouds (which I didn’t even see at first), reminds me not so much of a mythical Jewish carpenter as a different famous face.

I’m continually amazed at the religious pandering that the Calgary Herald will succumb to.

The story went that the student wore the same shirt several days in a row (let’s assume he washed it or had multiple ones and wasn’t suspended for stinking up the place) and was suspended when he refused to obey a demand by the school’s principal that he no longer wear the shirt.

Quick to stand up for free speech and religious freedom, Centre for Inquiry Canada released a press release condemning the school.

"While CFI sponsored the Atheist Bus Campaign, we are a strong champion of freedom of speech and freedom of religion," said National Communications Director Justin Trottier. "This shirt causes no harm and is a perfectly acceptable contribution to the marketplace of ideas."

I could point out again how CFI did not sponsor the Atheist Bus Campaign (except in Kelowna) – the Freethought Association of Canada did – but that’s not my point here.

With any sensational news story, I think we all ought to put our skeptic hats and try to figure out what is really going on before we rush to comment. And in this case, it turns out there’s quite a bit more there.

Students said William Swinimer has been preaching and making them feel uncomfortable, and the shirt was the last straw so they complained.

"He's told kids they'll burn in hell if they don't confess themselves to Jesus," student Riley Gibb-Smith said.

Katelyn Hiltz, student council vice-president, agreed the controversy didn't begin with the T-shirt.

"It started with him preaching his religion to kids and then telling them to go to hell. A lot of kids don't want to deal with this anymore," she said.

Furthermore, the students father has begun pulling William from any class beyond the basics.

"He will not attend this school unless they are having reading, writing and arithmetic — good old-fashioned academics," he said, waving a New Testament bible. "When they're having forums, when they're having other extra-curricular activity, he will not attend that school."

I guess that means no evolution, sex-ed, or critical thinking for poor William.

This background doesn’t change the fact that suspended a student for wearing a t-shirt is wrong, but it does give the context of why such a seemingly disproportionate measure was taken. The school was fed up with an obnoxious Jesus freak shoving his religion down everyone’s throats. The school administrators have a duty to ensure that all students feel welcome and safe at the school and are able to learn, if one student is compromising that security, then they’re bound to find a way to deal with it.

If anyone else had worn that t-shirt, they would have been fine, but couple it to a continued campaign of disruptions, and I can understand and potentially support the school’s actions.

Of course, we likely still don’t have a complete story. We don’t know the extent that William pushed his religion on others and we don’t know how many people complained about it. We likely never will.

But this is precisely why organizations that want to maintain some semblance of credibility on these issues ought to hesitate before crying wolf. It’s nice to be the first to comment, but without the full context, one can come off as ignorant and closed-minded.

Friendly Atheist and high school math teach Hemant Mehta was also generally supportive of the suspension.

Premier Alison Redford is a red-Tory. Once thought extinct, this political species truly represents the “Progressive Conservative” brand. Socially liberal but fiscally conservative, these politicians have no desire to restrict human rights, while also want to keep deficits small and let business operate more freely. Redford won her party’s leadership by promising to support teachers and doctors.

Danielle Smith is a pure libertarian, direct from the Fraser Institute, and seems to legitimately have no interest in legislating along morality. Unfortunately for her, her party comes from a combination of fringe far-right parties (Wildrose and the Alberta Alliance) which sought to push these socially regressive policies. Smith, believing that free speech means speech should have no consequences, refused to distance herself or her party from the racist and homophobic views that were all too common in a slate of fringe nutcases, and consequently her party was trounced in the city that recently elected a brown Muslim university professor as mayor and in the other city that has a popular Jewish mayor.

The Liberal Party of Alberta is cursed by their name, despite being entirely independent from their federal cousins who forever tarnished the big red brand in Alberta. Their leader, Raj Sherman, is a former Progressive Conservative cabinet minister, who was kicked (or quit, I forget) from caucus for openly criticizing the government over its handling of health care. He joined and then became the leader of the Liberals, but failed to make a break through. Many thought with a PC leader that the Liberals would curve right and attempt to bleed soft PC support from the left while the Wildrose tore in from the right. Instead, he released a platform to the left of the NDP, promising new taxes on the rich (Alberta currently has a flat income tax) and free university tuition.

The NDP doubled its caucus and nearly won in Lethbridge with a popular local candidate. Its leader, Brian Mason, was the only veteran leader, but he has yet to break through in quite the way that Jack Layton did for the federal NDP. They almost sadly consider getting 11% of the vote and 4 seats to be a rousing success.

Finally, the Alberta Party started basically through Twitter and Web 2.0 fads, focussed on “doing politics differently”, nominated and targeted only a few ridings, and failed to even make a dent in any. The Alberta Greens were de-registered after the previous election for failing to file their paperwork, and their former leader was just elected as a Wildrose MLA (basically the Greens were really big on property rights which aligned with the Wildrose). In place of the Greens was the EverGreen Party that failed to even register on the radar (can anyone name their leader?).

Party loyalty and tribalism being what they are, there is little to no chance that the Liberals, NDP, and other left or centre alternatives will make efforts to cooperate or merge. Therefore, under first-past-the-post, these parties will continue to split the vote in many ridings and the best hope for progressive policies in Alberta in this election was in many of the PC candidates.

This past week has seen blow up and scandal plague Alberta politics, as the boobs come off the Wildrose bus. First, we have a compilation of quotes by Danielle Smith shaping her as a Christian Libertarian, then we have her denouncing established climate science, plus she has refused to chasten her candidates for slandering the Edmonton Public School Board and damning homosexuals to burn in “the lake of fire” or for saying that being white is an advantage.

It’s well established that Conservative Party of Canada insiders, like former strategist Tom Flanagan and past Edmonton-Strathcona candidate Ryan Hastman, are working closely with the Wildrose Party. So we shouldn’t be surprised to see the social conservative forces, fresh off their recent Ottawa takeover, are feeling threatened by a new Albertan premier who started to put a bit too much emphasis on the progressive in Progressive Conservative.

Meanwhile, in Ottawa, backbencher Stephen Woodworth will get to argue for rolling back the start of life (and thereby rolling back women’s rights) sometime soon.

It’s therefore encouraging to see Molly Grave’s new YouTube series “Prime Minister Stephen Harper & Canada’s Religious Right”, which has two episodes posted so far:

With luck (and the polls may be starting to turn around), these recent controversies will pull the Wildrose back from majority territory and into a minority situation. It is likely that we will then see (in a cruel irony to their federal brethren) a Wildrose coalition government, supported by either the NDP, Liberals, or both.

Now, like the last UK election where the natural alliance would seem to be between Labour and the Liberal-Democrats, it is very likely that given the balance of power, both the NDP and Liberals would rather see a change in guard then continue to prop up the Tory dynasty. For at very least, it would be easier to fight an election against a relatively new government, then one with such a long history. However, progressive Albertans should heed England’s lessons as such a coalition could still mean harsh, unnecessary austerity and regressive policies, all at the cost of a few minor concessions (like electoral reform).

So I’m a little less pessimistic about Alberta’s future than a week ago, if only because a few Liberal or NDP cabinet ministers could be enough to stave off the harsher portions of the Wildrose social policy. Nevertheless, I’m not envious of my friends and family in Alberta who are faced with these options.

Background

I’m running Windows 7 Ultimate with a Diamond Wonder 750 USB TV Tuner Card. I have an ATI HD5570 HDMI video card which outputs to my AV amp, which in turns goes to my surround sound system and my TV. Because I’m cheap and live in Vancouver, I hooked my tuner card up to an antenna to take advantage of the 7 high-definition over-the-air digital channels that are available.

I was previously using TotalMedia to watch and record TV, but the program was slow and was unable to pull the TV listings from the internet. Couple that with a couple other issues, and I wanted to reformat the computer, starting from a fresh Windows 7 install.

Windows Media Center does not like ATSC in Canada

Canada completed the switch to digital signals last year. This means all antenna broadcasts are in crystal clear digital high-definition.

The downside is that Microsoft has never tried to offer support for digital television in Canada (which comes through the same ATSC standard as in the USA). This is why I previously had to use TotalMedia to watch TV – Windows Media Centre refused to recognize my digital tuner because I said I lived in Canada.

Luckily, there’s a workaround, which is compiled into a simple batch file available on the Microsoft Experts forum. Just download the file there, run the ATSC support, and it should work.

As an added bonus, you can run the other batch file they wrote to enable guide support, which they have even automated for the major markets in Canada.

Windows Media Center does not like HDMI Audio

With that working, I managed to run into my next error.

Whenever I clicked on LiveTV, I would get a couple seconds of TV with no sound before an error message popped up saying:

Video Error

Files needed to display video are not installed or are not working correctly. Restart Windows Media Center or restart the computer.

Additionally, when I ran the WMC Set Up Audio system and selected HDMI audio, it would not produce any sound. Videos and menus would make sounds until I tried to watch TV, and then WMC would quit making any noise.

After some Googling, some suggested running WMC as an Administrator, but this didn’t work for me.

What did work was opening my Playback devices under sound settings, opening the properties of my HDMI audio device, and unselecting “Allow applications to take exclusive control of this device” under Advanced.

Everything seems to be working now. Hopefully something in here helps you set up your own HTPC / free-PVR system.

Moderate, pragmatic, and relatively progressive ideas were starting to take hold. Plans were on the way to improve the Alberta School Act and mass transit was taking precedence over freeways.

But now polls are suggesting that Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Party are on track to a majority government. Of course, polls can be wrong, and things can still turn around for Redford (or for that matter for Brian Mason or Raj Sherman), but we’re sitting in dangerous territory.

Much ink is starting to spill on Smith’s dangerous flirtations with so-called conscience rights whereby marriage commissioners and physicians would be free to discriminate against gays, lesbians, interracial couples, and women. Dave Cournoyer took a closer look at some of the candidates carrying the Wildrose flag, showing that a Wildrose government could very easily put homophobes, Christian extremists, and bigots into cabinet.

I think the key to understanding Albertan politics is that it’s not so much about left or right, conservative or liberal, but about pure populist tribalism.

In over 100 years, the province has been represented by 4 different governments. The leaders change, but the governments are routinely re-elected, so long as they maintain the air of competence (actual competence is not required).

When government change occurs, it seems a bit like dominos falling. Once a certain threshold of legitimacy is crossed by the opposition – or perhaps illegitimacy by the current government – voters move en masse to the new choice.

This is why the federal Conservatives win with more than 60% of the vote in many Alberta ridings and arguably even how Linda Duncan increased her share of the vote in 2011. It also explains the quick rise of Naheed Nenshi, the rising support of Stephen Mandel, and the lasting strength of other mayors like Dave Bronconnier and Al Duerr.

It’s this key that also worries me most. With the Wildrose is seen as the alternative and the PCs looking like corrupt crooks, it could very well shift even more. Hence, my bets (and fears) for the final result are Wildrose – 50%, PCs – 19%, Liberals & NDP – 11% each, Alberta Party/EverGreens – 4% each, others – 1%.

Here’s what a majority Harper Conservative budget looks like.

The Good

This budget will finally eliminate the penny. With prices of just about everything over $1, we don’t need 1/100th of this. While UNICEF may fear for their Halloween collections, in all likelihood they can now count on nickels and dimes to instantly increase their revenue by a factor of 5-10.

We are also promised $275 million and new legislation to improve First Nations education. I’m not sure if this is enough, but we definitely need to provide First Nations with the opportunity for a quality education.

There is also a plan to standardize all government emails to one system. Perhaps they’ll do like the University of Alberta and adopt Gmail. Regardless, this is one of those decisions that just makes sense.

Increasing the duty free limits is a simple and popular choice. It risks some harm to Canadian stores near the border but overall will likely be a good thing.

There are several other issues that I’m not informed enough to know if the funding is adequate but are areas I generally support:

• $205 million over one year for Hiring Credit for Small Business.
• Give $50 million over two years to Youth Employment Strategy.
• Give $150 million over two years on Community Infrastructure Improvement fund
• Give $105 million next year to Via Rail for operational and capital projects.
• Give $101 million over next five years for Esquimalt Graving Dock.
• Give $50 million over two years to protect wildlife at risk.
• Refund $130 million in application and processing fees to skilled foreign workers stuck in immigration limbo.
• Provide $9.6 million over three years to the RCMP to fight counterfeiting.
• Give $ 99.2 million over three years to help the provinces create permanent flood mitigation measures.
• Give $8 million to clean up low-level radioactive waste in Port Hope and Clarington, Ont.
• Provide $44 million over two years to the Canadian Grain Commission to reform their funding model.
• Provide $13.5 million over two years to improve pipeline safety.
• Give $35.7 million over two years to improve tanker safety and inspections, emergency preparedness related to oil spills and updated charts for shipping routes.
• Cut $2.1 billion from the Department of National Defence over the next three years.
• Give $5.2 billion over 11 years to the Canadian Coast Guard.
• Increase employee-contribution levels to pension plans for those working in Canadian Forces, RCMP, Public Service Commission and parliamentarians.

The Bad

While the government talks a good game about creating jobs, they will be destroying nearly 20,000 in three years in the public service. They are also continuing their assault on the public service by raising their retirement age to 65. This, coupled with the much-publicized rising age for Old Age Security to 67, means that there will be far fewer good jobs for my generation and those to come.

Then there’s the red-tape cutting gone mad. For every regulation they remove, we should be asking: Why was that procedure created in the first place? Many may be legitimately over-bureaucratic, but when it comes to sensitive ecosystems and public health, should we not be more cautious rather than less?

The Ugly

Finally, there are the things that really piss me off.

First, we have the attempt to kill our wildly successful fundamental research culture in Canada, replacing it with “business-led, industry-relevant research.” This means more projects like my masters that contribute little to the scientific community but may result in a minor efficiency improvement for mega-corporations like Honeywell, and fewer projects like my wife’s that seek to better understand the fundamental nature of superconductivity in exotic materials (which may have industrial relevance 10-20 years from now). This policy is horribly short-sighted and flies in the face of the long history of fundamental science producing technological breakthroughs.

Then there’s the decision to stop policing health claims on food labels. I’ll need to look more into this decision, but this could be another strike to the skeptic community. Just as the organized skeptic movement is getting ready for a dramatic shift forward, we see the federal government wash its hands of ensuring public health claims are based on evidence. We may soon see Cheerios promising to cure cancer or toxic cleaning solutions falsely labelled as child-friendly, with consumers being expected to make decisions without any independent verification of the claims. It’s a libertarian’s wet dream and a pragmatist’s nightmare.

They also want charities to provide more information about their political activities and their funding from foreign sources (source). While I would say this would be a positive thing in exposing questionably charitable organizations like the Fraser Institute, in all likelihood it’s targeted at those “foreign-funded radical environmental groups” like the David Suzuki Foundation and Pembina Institute who have been at the forefront of opposing the unsustainable development agenda of the Harper Conservatives. At very least this will make filing taxes more painful for organizations already struggling with lower donations due to the recession.

Then there’s the stupid ideological positions (as though the last two weren’t) that make no real sense. Like the firm commitment to no new taxes or tax increases. There’s the plan to make the Governor General pay income tax in 2013, which sounds reasonable until you realize their salary is paid by taxes. Or the decision to sell $80 million worth of foreign residences – which like pawning your CD collection is not a long term solution to revenue issues. Or the shutting down of Assisted Human Reproduction Canada when our birth rate is already bottoming out. Or the scrapping of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, because why should we aim for sustainable development when we can just have good old development? Or cutting the CBC budget by 10% out of spite.

But at least Harper’s finally killing the Public Appointments Commission that was created in 2006 as part of his faux-accountability reforms, only to be scrapped when the opposition refused his partisan appointments to the commission, leaving a million dollar bureaucracy behind.

The Rest

Of course there’s a few remaining tidbits that I’m just not sure about.

I feel $450 million for sports facilities in the GTA is unnecessary, but it’s likely more political than ideological and likely any party in power would give something to them. I only hope the facilities add to the local community.

I’m not informed enough about the EI premium rate or its deficit to know if its increases need to be capped at 5 cents a year. And I also don’t know what the $5.2 billion in savings the Citizen is reporting includes.

Conclusions

It’s a Conservative budget. Ideological, harsh, and out of touch. There’s nothing in it to really be excited about as a progressive. I’d definitely deal with pennies in my pocket if it meant science would get the respect it deserves in this country.

*Newsworthy meaning devoid of real content but sure to generate water cooler gossip that overshadows real events.

I'll be starting the feed at 10:00 AM PDT on Friday and ending on Saturday afternoon when the voting ends.

As a special preview before the convention begins, here’s the updated Google Insight graphs, showing Mulcair’s interest peaked, while Cullen and Nash continue to rise. Meanwhile, in the second graph, we can see Singh blew his coverage about the time he endorsed Mulcair for second. Furthermore, we see Mulcair owning Quebec with Topp a bit behind. Cullen owns British Columbia and Topp has a slight lead over Nash in Ontario. Finally, Niki Ashton actually outpaces Cullen (who ties Singh) in Ontario.

If the above frame doesn't work, just follow me on Twitter.

23 March 2012 - 4:35 PM - I've been thinking about it this afternoon and I am starting to think that Cullen backed off of his joint nomination scheme in his showcase. While cooperation was still prominent, he talked about "an open, respectful, democratic conversation about cooperation," which sounds less like he'd use a win as a signal that he's allowed to force through his proposal, but rather that it would be approval to begin the dialogue within the party on whether it was a route we wanted to take. This would still take time away from actively campaigning about the kind of country we want (and most Canadians too). This potential retreat from controversy allowed Cullen to speak on his strengths - building coalitions to fight for social justice, the environment, and equality. Perhaps it may just be the move to get him the later round support to win.

As for the rest of the showcases, it appears podiums make people worse speakers. The best speeches were Cullen, Ashton, Singh, and Nash. I was most impressed by Singh's flash video. It was catchy and told a story that every other video lacked. It's good to have this guy in the party and hopefully someone makes him Health Minister one day, but he still ended with "God bless Canada", a phrase that silenced an otherwise predominantly godless crowd.

I've already cast my first round vote for Niki Ashton. There are far too many naysayers who discount her because of her age.

I don't know who I will vote for in the next round but am leaning back and forth between Topp and Cullen if Niki drops off. I suspect anyone with less than 10% support will drop. After Mulcair's pompous performance today, I don't see myself supporting him in this race. Nash was better than I've seen her but I'm still hesitant.

Check back here tomorrow for more updates.

But I’ve never seen anything where an MP from across the country takes the time to read my concerns in their entirety and responds in kind to each point.

Last week, I mentioned that the NDP are still chasing down leads on the Office of Religious Freedom and after writing the post, I sent an email to Hélène Laverdière, NDP MP for Laurier – Ste-Marie, and Official Opposition Critic for Foreign Affairs. My email and her eloquent and detailed response are below the fold.

Dear Hélène Laverdière,

I was glad to read that you have continued to make inquiries into the Harper Conservative's Office of Religious Freedoms. It concerns me that the government continues to stonewall any attempts to be held accountable and I want to strongly encourage you to continue your investigations.

While I, the NDP, and most Canadians, are strongly committed to human rights, including religious freedoms, this office has raised much scepticism over its secrecy. Many like myself are also worried that this office will be used to push a narrow religious ideology into Canada's foreign policy and will threaten our implicit separation of church and state. We also see this office as more likely to promote freedom of religion while ignoring the equally important concept of freedom from religion. This concern is highlighted by the fact that no secular voices seem to have been included in the discussions around this office.

So again, I urge you to continue your investigation, and also question whether non-religious, secular humanist, and other secular viewpoints have been or will be included in discussions around this office.

Sincerely,

Ian Bushfield

Her response:

Dear Ian Bushfield,

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the establishment of an Office of Religious Freedom by the Harper Conservatives. As you noted in your email, the response I received recently from the government to my question on the Order Paper regarding the Office of Religious Freedom was wholly unsatisfactory.

Like you, I have concerns about the mandate, structure, and purpose of this office. New Democrats believe that Canada does and must continue to play an important role internationally in promoting the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. At the same time, we believe the question of religious freedom has to be understood within the broader context of freedoms and fundamental rights.

Aside from its narrow focus, concerns have surfaced around the consultation process during the development of this Office. We understand from media reports that faith leaders consulted on this initiative were invited primarily from Western religions, with the near-exclusion of representatives from Eastern religions. There are also practical concerns that the mandate of the Office is ill-defined, which may lead to difficulties in implementing this initiative within a broader departmental framework.

New Democrats would rather see the Canadian government focus on the important areas of institution-building, democracy promotion, and human rights. In the 2008 Speech from the Throne, the Harper government pledged to create “a new, non-partisan democracy promotion agency … to support the peaceful transition to democracy in repressive countries and help emerging democracies build strong institutions.” This initiative could have been an important way to share Canadian expertise on human rights, transparency and the rule of law with emerging democracies – and, in turn, ensure religious freedoms. It might have been used as a key part of Canada’s reaction to the Arab Spring. Unfortunately, the Conservatives broke their promise to establish this agency, and Canada lost an opportunity to provide international leadership in helping these emerging democracies.

The NDP’s position is reflected in comments made by Jinny Sims, our Deputy Foreign Affairs Critic and Critic for International Cooperation, during a debate in the House of Commons in October 2011. As Ms. Sims said on October 27^th in the House, “I am not sure spending $5 million on another office would actually get us where we need to go. I would like to see those resources put toward a non-partisan agency that would promote democracy. The NDP and I are very committed to religious freedom. There is no magic agency that is going to fix this.” (Ms. Sims’ comments can be found here)

Mr. Bushfield, thank you also for raising an important point about the inclusion of secular voices. We will be sure to consider this as we continue to monitor this issue over the coming months. I want to assure you that we will continue to encourage the Canadian government to focus on the more important international issues, rather than those that are politically expedient for the Conservative Party.

Sincerely,

Hélène Laverdière
MP, Laurier – Ste-Marie
Official Opposition Critic for Foreign Affairs

I emphasized the bit that made me happiest in there. Feel free to add your voice in support of uncovering the motivations behind this Office by emailing Helene.Laverdiere.A2@parl.gc.ca

The NDP leadership convention kicks off tomorrow (early in the morning out here on the left West coast), so I’ll either be blogging or Tweeting the action as it happens. Then on Saturday, I’ll be joining Vancouver Point-Grey New Democrats at the Sunshine Grill in Kitsilano for brunch and to vote and watch the results live. Of course because the first round will be announced at 7 AM, we will be voting for the first 2 rounds before meeting there at 10 AM.