First Segment Marks: #abdb8 #abvote Smith B+, Sherman F, Mason B-, Redford B

Redford held her own, but Smith did very well.  She needs to jump in more and speak up when needed.  Sherman is dropping the ball.

Opening Statements: Smith A-, Sherman F, Redford C, Mason B

Danielle Smith seemed nice and relaxed, Brian Mason did very well too.  Sherman was way too stiff, and Redford sounded rehearsed.

Liveblogging the #abvote debate

As best as I can, I will be liveblogging the debate tonight starting at 6:30.  You can also find me participating in the online chat on Sun News Network’s website, and also on Twitter.  I will try to get a video blog entry out a bit later on.

Stirring up a Hornet’s Nest. #wrp #pcaa #abvote

Well, my last post certainly stirred up a hornet’s nest of angry responses.

Good.

KikkiPlanet, of course, is the most vehement in her response:

Let’s examine a few points here: First, calling Kikki a “Terrorist” isn’t an ad hominem “attack”.  There is no such thing as an “ad hominem” attack.  Ad hominem is a form of red herring argumentation technique.

Wikipedia explains ad hominem this way:

An ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.^[1] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy.^[2][3][4]

In my previous posting, I did indeed characterize Kikki as a “Terrorist”, but not as an attempt to refute her arguments.  I refuted those arguments separately.  What I did, and I believe correctly, was characterize the persuasion tactics she uses as terrorism – use of fear to influence people.

I would not have an issue with Kikki’s arguments if she had explained, logically, without hysterics, why she didn’t like conscience rights.  Maybe she truly does believe that marriage commissioners should be forced to marry any couple who wants to get married.  That’s a perfectly valid opinion to hold.  I disagree with it, but that doesn’t matter in this case.  There are numerous calm, rational, and logical arguments one can make to back up why, for example, marriage commissioners should be forced to marry anyone, just as there are numerous clam, rational and logical arguments one can make why marriage commissioner should have the right to act in accordance with their own personal moral compass.  Who’s correct?  That’s for the voters to decide on April 23, but reducing the argument to hyperbolic garbage, suggesting that doctors will be allowed to refuse to treat people based on race, gender, or sexual orientation is nothing more than absurdity.  It raises the spectre of fear, and, by using that fear as a weapon to influence how people vote, Kikki is engaging in terrorism.

The Terrorism Campaign Intensifies #pcaa #wrp #abvote

I’ve been accused, by using the term “terrorism” of insulting the victims of terrorism around the world.

Let me be clear: that is not my intent.  There is no disrespect.

At all.

The horrible events of 9/11 and other dates around the world ring loud and clear with me.  I remember that morning like it was yesterday, listening to the radio as the Twin Towers came crumbling down, killing 3,000 people in the process.

No.  Unlike the “truthers”, I have respect for the victims of terrorism, and for those who fight the terrorists.

However none of that contradicts what I am about to say.

You see, terrorism, in its base form, is the use of fear to influence people.  That’s it.  That’s all.  The word “terror” is rooted, after all in “fear”.  So, whether one is violent, or not, if one uses fear to influence behaviour, then one is engaging in terrorism.

KikkiPlanet.com posted this gem earlier tonight, posting about “Conscience Rights” that are included in the policy of the Wildrose Party.

Let me be clear before I go any further:

I am not a member of the Wildrose Party.  I speak for myself.  I do not speak for the Wildrose Party.

At all.

However, KikkiPlanet’s gross mischaracterization of Conscience Rights needs to be addressed.

According to KikkiPlanet:

Conscience Rights allow doctors to ignore the oath they took when they became doctors. Conscience rights allow lawyers to ignore the oath they took to uphold the law, above all else, when they stood before the Bar to be admitted, thus allowing them to refuse to act on behalf of someone of a different race.

Conscience rights allow marriage commissioners to refuse to marry same sex couples, despite the fact that those same commissioners are given powers by a government that acknowledges the rights of gays to marry.

Conscience rights allow pharmacists to refuse to fill certain prescriptions. Conscience rights would allow me, if I were a doctor, to deny treatment to a Christian, based on the fact that I’m an atheist.

Conscience rights allow doctors to refuse to perform or recommend fertility treatments.

It’s bullshit, of course.

Conscience rights means that a marriage commissioner who happens to oppose gay marriage on religious grounds, can simply say to a couple, “I’m sorry, I personally cannot marry you on a matter of personal conscience, however here is a list of marriage commissioners who would be more than willing to marry you.”

Is this really – REALLY – such a big deal?

It’s called a referral, and it happens all the time.  I once needed some dental work done, and asked my dentist if he used nitrous oxide.  He said he did not, but could refer me to one who did.  As it turns out, I didn’t need the work after all, but that’s how these things work.

Nobody will be denied the opportunity to get married.

Doctors take an oath to heal people.  The oath ensures, amongst other things, confidentiality.  A doctor, by the Hippocratic Oath, cannot refuse to provide a medically necessary treatment based on the behavioural choice of a patient.

Nobody will be denied health care services because they’re gay.  Or black.  Or an atheist.

Nobody is going to bleed to death because a doctor won’t treat them.

Nobody is going to be refused birth control pills because a pharmacist is Catholic.

This is nothing more than terrorism.

And, like Bob Rae, the people engaging in this believe you’re stupid enough to believe them.

Do us all a favour: prove them wrong.

Vote Wildrose.

Gazing into the Crystal Ball. 2012 Alberta Election Prediction #ableg #wrp #pcaa #abvote

Plugging the latest Ipsos Reid numbers into an election prediction algorithm is fun, can be extremely tricky, probably wildly inaccurate, and yields some very interesting results:

Best. Political. Campaign. Ad. Ever.

Okay, so I didn’t produce this ad.

But I wish I did, so I could take credit for it.

Updated Opening/Closing

I wasn’t entirely happy with the title sequences on my blog post, “Bob Rae Things You’re Stupid“, so I decided to update them.

Here’s the new opening sequence:

and here’s the closing sequence:

I have also re-mastered my prior video blog to feature the new opening and closing sequences, but I wanted to share them independently as well.

Enjoy!