Duffy Kicks Fruitfly Suzuki's Butt!

I would love to see a verbal match between Duffy and Suzuki, Duffy would win hands down, but Suzuki refuses to debate anyone, ever. 

 I bet CTV is still missing this guy:



He seems happier now that he doesn't have to hide the fact that he is a Conservative. Lefties are still in shock that they could have enjoyed watching him all those years, never suspecting that he was a Conservative. That is unbiased reporting, and it hit lefties smack in the face when they realized that Senator Duffy wasn't actually one of them. Heck, I'm a Conservative and I never suspected he was a Conservative. 


It looks like the Conservative Senators are going to discover how badly foreign interests have corrupted our democracy through the use of environmental groups. Revenue Canada had better sit up and take notice, because they are now in the spotlight. 


I know of one tiny little charity that lost it's charitable status because of a minor accounting error, it just about caused them to shut down the real charitable work they were doing. So why doesn't Revenue Canada go after these environmental groups who are clearly lobbyists? Is Revenue Canada as Liberal as Elections Canada? Who holds both of them to account? No one as far as I can figure.


The Senate is showing us that they are relevant and can tackle tough issues. Good for them. My biggest disappointment with the Senate is that a failed Liberal leader from Alberta, who hates the oil sands can not be booted out of the Senate by Albertans. He is an arrogant Liberal who thinks that Albertans opinions don't matter, and he could care less what you want. I know, I've emailed him and just about got sick reading his response to my concerns, try it for yourself. Ask him why an Albertan doesn't support the oil sands, see what response you get.

Grant Mitchell   -   Liberal Party of Canada

Province:

Alberta

Senatorial Designation:

Alberta

Appointed on the advice of:

Martin (Lib.)

Telephone:

613-995-4254 or 1-800-267-7362

Fax:

613-995-4265

Email:

mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca

Charities Or Lobbyists?

Interesting the Suzuki Foundation is a charity, yet he walked down the road, obviously supporting Dalton in the provincial election.

According to Revenue Canada rules, this is a huge violation of their laws.

6.1 What are prohibited activities?
A charity may not take part in an illegal activity or a partisan political activity. A partisan political activity is one that involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to, any political party or candidate for public office.

When a political party or candidate for public office supports a policy that is also supported by a charity, the charity is not prevented from promoting this policy. However, a charity in this situation must not directly or indirectly support the political party or candidate for public office. This means that a charity may make the public aware of its position on an issue provided:

it does not explicitly connect its views to any political party or candidate for public office;

Well, Suzuki publicly supported Dalton in the last election, this is in clear violation of the Act. Thanks for the video Just Right!

Another funny thing is that balance sheets are supposed to be balanced, but from the information on the government site, that is not the case.
Assets: Cash, bank accounts, and short-term investments 4100 $ 1,007,665 Amounts receivable from non-arm's length parties 4110 $ 600,494 Amounts receivable from all others 4120 Investments in non-arm's length parties 4130 Long-term investments 4140 $ 7,398,963 Inventories 4150 Land and buildings in Canada 4155 Other capital assets in Canada 4160 $ 2,455,012 Capital assets outside Canada 4165 Accumulated amortization of capital assets 4166 $ -940,512 Other assets 4170 $ 299,516 Total assets (add lines 4100 to 4170) 4200 $ 10,821,138 Amount included in lines 4150, 4155, 4160, 4165 and 4170 not used in charitable programs 4250 Liabilities: Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 4300 $ 431,820 Deferred revenue 4310 $ 1,446,197 Amounts owing to non-arm's length parties 4320 Other liabilities 4330 $ 536,483 Total liabilities (add lines 4300 to 4330) 4350 $ 2,414,500 Can any accountants explain this to me? Or does it mean that the missing 8,000,000 is in owner's equity, or maybe check Suzuki's pocket.
From the same resource, I find this interesting:
C4 Did the charity carry on, fund, or provide any resources through employees, volunteers, agents, joint ventures, contractors, or any other individuals, intermediaries, entities, or means (other than qualified donees) for any activity/program/project outside Canada? 2100 No If yes, you must complete and attach Schedule 2, Activities Outside Canada, to your return.
Well this seems to be that someone connected to the Suzuki Foundation was  "carrying on" "outside of Canada"... Don't watch it, I'm just using it as proof that Suzuki was carrying on outside of Canada, yet their return to Revenue Canada said that NO we didn't do any protesting outside of Canada.
Revenue Canada needs to stop all these environmental groups from getting charitable status, they are powerful lobby groups, not charities. What has the Suzuki Foundation ever done to stop real pollution? Are they out planting trees? Nope, the dopes go to Bali by plane, and dress in polar bear costumes so they can pass out in the heat. Why not hold the next conference in Yellowknife in February? Right.....HA!

In Stark Contrast...

Some posters to a previous post of mine, got me thinking.

Why do artists get funding when many respectable charities have to rely totally on private funding? So I googled arts funding government of Canada, this is what I got:



Yup, the government of Canada definitely funds the arts. How about, let's say guide dog organizations, which are closest to my heart? So I googled guide dog funding government of Canada, and this is what I got:



Do you see the difference? I see the difference.

Nope, no funding for guide dogs who help the blind, autistic children, hearing impaired, epileptic, and handicapped. Think about how these dogs help improve the physical and mental health of those people they help. This is only one example of charities that go begging while artists have the Canada Council of the Arts who hand out grants for even foreign artists to be brought to Canada. Yes you heard that right, Canadian taxpayers pay for foreign artists to visit Canada.

All invited artists must be recognized as professionals in their discipline. The Canada Council defines a professional artist as someone who has specialized training in the field (not necessarily in an academic institution), who is recognized as such by her or his peers (artists working in the same artistic tradition), and who has a history of public presentation or publication.

Grant Amount

Grants are available in fixed amounts of $500, $750, $1,000, $1,500, $2,000, $2,500 or $3,000.

Application Form

Visiting Foreign Artists (Pilot Program) (PDF Acrobat format).
This form can only be printed and cannot be filled out on-line.

How about for each guide dog who graduates, the organization gets a $5,000 grant? If all guide dog organizations in Canada graduate 200 dogs a year, that's only $1,000,000? Artists are complaining about 48 million in cuts to a 3+ BILLION budget, kind of puts things into perspective doesn't it?

The problem is that the arts have a huge vocal lobby group, the disabled are voiceless. I want a Canada Council for the Disabled, that can give out grants to charitable organizations who at the grassroots are actually improving people's lives. I want to see a parade of guide dogs on Parliament Hill, I want to see MP's from all parties explain why they do not deserve funding. Unfortunately, the disabled do not have the money to fly to Ottawa to make their case.

Ingrates!

This article really disgusts me, it shows how low, supposedly humanitarian aid organizations, will stoop to bash this government. So much for donating to any of these organizations. Not one mentioned the 2 million that was immediately given, nor the 12 million since. Nope, all they can whine about is the matching donations.

Strings attached to feds' pledge to match donations

OTTAWA -- The federal government's offer to match Canadian donations to disaster relief efforts in China and Burma turns out to be nowhere near as generous as it initially appeared.

Humanitarian groups have been disappointed to discover the bulk of donations they've received thus far -- in the immediate aftermath of the disasters -- won't be matched at all.

Ingrates! You slimy little ingrates, whining about our taxpayer money not being enough. I want every one of these organizations to explain to me, why only a portion of what is donated to them actually gets to the people who need the help.

For example, American Red Cross CEO, salary $651,957? What's up with that? Yet they have the audacity to claim the Government of Canada isn't giving them enough? That $651,957 would buy a lot of rice to feed the people who are starving in Burma.

Still, humanitarian groups are reluctant to criticize the government's response to the latest disasters, noting Ottawa is providing direct funding to various relief agencies in addition to the matching funds.

Oh, so they are criticizing the government, but not really? This is a stinky smelling lefty statement. Are they saying they will get funding cut off if they protest? Where is the proof? Has the government said, we will not give you anymore money if you protest? NOPE! But that sentence implies exactly that.

However belated or limited, aid groups are hopeful the promise of matching funding will encourage a second wave of donations from Canadians.

Now it's belated and limited? 14 million to Burma, 2 million immediately is belated? Maybe if the junta would open up the country so help could be given, the real people being affected might benefit. Not one mention of the restrictions the junta have imposed, it's all about the Canadian government not doing enough.

Well, I will not let my pocket be picked anymore, these organizations need to get their own houses in order before they start pointing fingers. They can line up behind the CBC crying for more $$$, or behind Dion wanting to tax our air. Show me the results, and I will give you the money, until then, forget it. Remember, it's Conservatives who actually give money, the Liberals are too busy saving the world while sipping latte's in Starbucks. They have never met a good cause they couldn't discuss, endlessly.

Ingrates!