The new Pictures are up! Click on “Jade Pictures” to see them. They’ll also be in their own “February 2005″ link after tomorrow.

Mom and Jade returned from Sussex, New Brunswick on Saturday night. It was a long flight, but a good flight. Jade slept most of the way and was apparently in a decent mood.

I can’t believe how different she is just since a last saw her last week! She has teeth of course, but she also is making all sorts of new sounds and gestures. She rolls over instantly to her back when you put her on her tummy. She reaches out for mom when she really wants her or is playing shy.

She makes these funny “growling” sounds. Very cute. She also enjoys playing with her spoon when she’s eating. She incists on having you drag it back and forth across her mouth so she can make the “blubblublublub” sound. Then she happily drinks.

Unfortunately I don’t have time to say more… but suffice to say that all is well. We’re headed to swimming tomorrow. That should be fun. Jade went swimming i St. John and apparently had a lot of fun, so I think the secret must be not to expect much if she happens to be teething really badly one day!

We’re expecting some more teeth in a week or two. She had really really red cheeks yesterday, and was fairly grumpy, though she did go to sleep easily.

Anyway, that’s all, have fun checking out the pictures. There are many with Great Grandpa!

Send this to Friends

10s of thousands are protesting in the streets. They are Muslim and Christian alike.

The Pro-Syrian Lebanese government has resigned, even though they would have defeated a non-confidence vote. (BBC, ADBOI)

Is this going to be the “Cedar Revolution“?

Udpated 7 times
(more…)

Send this to Friends

I was asked to give my opinion of Mr. Bushs’ visit to Europe.

There were several times during Bushs’ tour when I considered posting something… but each time I took a step back and thought, “Has anything changed”?

And every time the answer was the same…. no.

There was so much talk about how Bush and Rice (does rice grow on bushes? would it be called a Rice Bush… ooooh, stop! Damn, where is my mind today)

Sorry… as I was saying, there was lots of talk about the US Administration “making nice” with Europe. But as far as I could tell it was just lip service on both sides. While things may not be nearly as acrimonious as they were in 2003/04 I think it is still clear that Bush, and his new mouthpiece Condi, have not changed. And neither have the Europeans.

Iran and Syria are now turning out to be the new Iraq. With the same players… exccept this time Britain is on the EUs’ side.

I also heard an interesting opinion of one reporter who was in Germany when George H. W. Bush visited in 1990. He was greeted by thousands of well-wishers and waving flags. His son, however, was greeted with completely deserted streets.

I don’t see Bushs’ visit as having changed anything. France, Britain and Germany will continue to push for diplomatic over military action for Iran. Russia will continue to supply missiles to Syria and Nuclear technology to Iran. Putin will also continue on his path of consolidating power in his country. The EU will eventually drop the embargo against China and open the flood gates to trade between the EU and the most populous country, and fastest growing economy in the world, leaving the US in the dust wishing.

What this trip to Europe has told me is that the US Presidents new “Mandate” means nothing in terms of getting the Europeans to subscribe to the Bush way of thinking. There will be continued tension as the EU evolves and molds into one voice and the US continues to push its’ “our way or the highway” mentality.

Oh, and I should add… as confirmation, Russia and Iran signed a deal on Sunday for Russia to supply Iran with nuclear fuel for its’ newly built Russian Nuclear reactor at Bushehr.

Send this to Friends

The more I watch FoxNews, and especially the more I watch Bill Oreilly, the more I love it.

It’s the kind of fun you have from watching a crocodile devour an antelope that got too close to the water.

I just watched a segment on an “abortion mill” in Kansas. Bill had a judge and a pro-life advocate on to discuss it. The poor pro-lifer didn’t stand a chance. No matter how much sense she was speaking the crocodiles weren’t interested in what she had to say, only how fast they could eat her.

At one point Oreilly says “oh wait now, I don’t want us to gain up on Ms. [Pro Lifer]” then 1 second later he says he and she have “philosophical differences”. She rolled her eyes, the Judge smirked.

The best part though was when the segment wrapped and they went to commercial. The first spot said:

“Fox News. We Report, You Decide”.

HA!

I could watch this channel all day!

Send this to Friends

Just reading through the Budget technical documents

Some interesting concerns that the government specifically raises:

• Despite the still-encouraging growth outlook for the Canadian and global economies, there remain significant risks.
• In the near term, the large and persistent U.S. current account deficit presents a key risk. This imbalance could result in a further depreciation of the U.S. dollar against all major currencies, including the Canadian dollar. The speed at which the economy adjusts to an appreciation of the Canadian dollar and the magnitude of the adjustment are also uncertain.
• Over the medium term, the U.S. budget deficit remains the principal downside risk. If not corrected, the deficit could put upward pressure on interest rates, crowd out business investment and dampen growth in both the U.S. and Canada. Conversely, a serious effort to reduce the budget deficit could temporarily lower growth in the U.S., which would also negatively affect Canadian growth.
• While the risks to the outlook are negative on balance, a strong macroeconomic framework has improved Canada’s ability to deal with these risks should they materialize.

What is the common thread throughout those three risks? The US.

And people wonder why Canadians are so interested in what goes on in America…

More interesting stuff commitments that you may not see in the regular media outlets: [My Comments are in Brackets]

• Introducing a non-refundable tax credit to recognize specified adoption expenses, up to a maximum of $10,000, effective for the 2005 tax year and beyond. [Interesting in light of our previous discussion, might be another way to help those who would like children, but cannot have them.]
• $126 million over five years to support groundbreaking research in particle physics at the University of British Columbia’s TRIUMF science facility.[Cool]
• $165 million to Genome Canada to sustain its support for breakthrough genomics research.[Can you say Avian Flu Vaccine?]
• The corporate surtax will be eliminated and the 21-per-cent general corporate income tax rate will be reduced to 19 per cent, maintaining our tax rate advantage relative to the U.S.[Anyone else find it surprising that Canada has had lower corporate taxes than the US? How are they calculating that?]
• $200 million over five years and a total of $920 million over 15 years to further stimulate the use of wind power to generate energy. This delivers on the Government of Canada’s commitment to quadruple the Wind Power Production Incentive.[This has been widely reported but...]
• $97 million over five years and a total of $886 million over 15 years to stimulate the development and use of forms of renewable energy other than wind, such as small hydro, biomass and landfill gas.[this has not been reported at all. And shouldn't be overlooked. I think the reason for the difference in funding is simply the perceived immediate benefit attainable with current technology. Small hydro and biomass, by definition are not large scale electricity producers, and hydrogen is still a ways off. One has to question why they would bother with the "15 years" point. Seriously... 15 years?]
• $425 million to support the immediate humanitarian response to the tsunami disaster and long-term reconstruction, including approximately $200 million to match donations made by individual Canadians.[Hooray for private Canadians donations!]
• $42 million over five years for increasing the diplomatic staff of Canada’s diplomatic missions abroad to strengthen our capacity to pursue a more engaged foreign policy and to represent Canada’s interests more effectively.[This is interesting... I wonder if we'll hear more about this after the International Policy Review is finished]
• $3.8 [of the $13 billion] for capital and other projects to support new roles for the military identified in the upcoming defence policy review.[We await eagerly that review !]
• $1.0 [of the $13 billion] billion over five years in support of key national security initiatives.[which will be what?]
• Canada was the only Group of Seven (G-7) country to record a total government budget surplus in 2004, for the third consecutive year, and is projected to be the only country in surplus again in 2005 and 2006.[credit where credit is due, Bravo]
• The 2005 budget maintains the annual $3-billion Contingency Reserve. It also includes an additional amount for economic prudence to provide greater assurance that the balanced budget targets will be met. If not needed, the amounts set aside for economic prudence will be released to fund government priorities. The Contingency Reserve—if not needed to deal with unforeseen circumstances—will go each and every year to reduce the federal debt (accumulated deficit).[I did not know of this difference between the COntingency Reserve and the "Economic Prudence"]
• This budget reaffirms the Government’s objective set out in the 2004 budget to reduce the federal debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio to 25 per cent by 2014–15. As a result, debt-servicing costs will absorb a smaller share of revenues, placing the Government in a better position to deal with the fiscal pressures of an aging population.[Again, Credit where credit is due... that sounds like a plan I'd make for my own retirement, why not the Government too?]
• The federal debt (accumulated deficit) as a percentage of GDP is projected to fall to 38.8 per cent in 2004–05, down from its peak of 68.4 per cent in 1995–96….it is estimated that the federal debt-to-GDP ratio will decline to about 30.6 per cent in 2009–10.

Lots of stuff to digest there! And there’s more to come later!

Send this to Friends