A pretty funny poll and a very funny commentary. Thanks for getting the week off to a hilarious start.

Can someone,anyone explain to Dion what the name of his website is?

2 days in a row he has sent people to greenshift.ca, who happen to be suing Dion. They have a banner saying their name has been hijacked. Is this like a unique form of Parisian masochism? Should we have a pool how many days out of 36 that Dion will send people to the wrong site?

Dion's conference was all about how Harper is a liar.

If Dion, just yesterday, said his campaign was not going to be negative, and he starts off calling Harper a liar, doesn't this make him a...er........a..liar?

I'm calling 188 seats for the Conservatives. I'm being conservative saying that.

I'm also factoring in the very best efforts of Canada's dismal, dishonest media to shaft Canadians for their very own selfish comfy fur reasons.

I like the look of the Segma lineup. It looks about right to me!

With the rise of the Green party, and with Dion moving the Liberals to the left, there is a real possibility of vote splitting among progressives. This would reduce the percentage of popular vote needed by the conservatives to gain a majority.

When the tories and reforms split the vote, they had the good sense and political will to merge. They were rewarded with government.

If the tories get a majority, will there be a merge on the left, or will partisan bickering mean the left remains fragmented and impotent?

First day of the campaign, talk about peaking to soon! - The lame stream media will rampage about not giving Harper a majority. They'll work this argument to death...

Polls are interesting and entertaining. But there's only one that counts. Let's hope, but at the same time work as though we're five points behind. Anything can change in six weeks.

I'm skeptical.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to that poll. Seems too much of a blip. Never heard of that polling firm before, besides.

Why, by the way, would a separatist be afraid of a Conservative majority? Would a Conservative majority somehow make separation virtually impossible?

Heh. Separatists know that a Conservative majority is bad for separatists. Good for Quebec as a "nation" within the "nation" of Canada, though!

Separatists prefer a Liberal majority. Because a Liberal majority or even a Liberal minority always seems to breathe new life into the separatist movement, whereas it appears to be the opposite with a Conservative government.

I mean, hey, the Conservatives united the country with just a minority. Imagine how good they'll do with a majority.

Take nothing for granted. It would be nice to think that the voters have some sense.

BTW, Greek, I note that the percentages you posted above are for Ontario, not national ones. Nationally, it's 43-25 for the Tories!

Time for the predictable abortion questions!!! There'll be Liberal candidates hiding out in shrubs and trees everywhere awaiting the prime moment to ambush the PM. Let the fun and games begin!

Not a chance. My guess is we will see a Parliament that is pretty similar to the one we have now. The Liberal brand is too powerful to be decimated like that. Best case scenario, the Tories grab another 8-10 seats in Quebec and add a couple in Ontario. They are going to lose most of their seats in Atlantic Canada as well as Emerson's seat in BC. They might also lose a couple Saskatchewan seats to the NDP, since Dion has screwed the Liberals royally in that province and so a few seats the Tories won by vote-splitting could go to the Dippers.

The Libs, NDP and Greens are all trying to ride the left's new hero Obama's empty rhetoric to victory, while chasing the same demographic.
I hope they knock themselves out.
Meanwhile this morning Dion has turned himself into an attack puppy,presumably because no one in the Libs wants to step up to defend the incomprehensible Green Shift ,not even his point man/commincations guru Garth Turner who yesterday had this quote on his blog:
" You have not even seen our plan yet. Patience. All will be revealed. — Garth"
I hope the voting public see Mad Puppy Dion every day,everyone needs a good daily laugh.

It is far too early for this poll to be in any meaningful. There's always the group of people that *might* vote Conservative but are (wrongfully, imho) afraid of a majority so the hedge their bets until later. This time around though I think the numbers may fluctuate as usual but in the end may not be too far off once Dion gets slaughtered in the debates and people see just what an inept incomprehensible tool he is.

Time for the predictable abortion questions!!!

And right on cue, the rat face one is all over that today ... like a mangy dog with an old buried bone...sigh.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=2832f9c8-065d-4a45-9716-183fb625ce0d

snip:Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a right-wing ideologue inspired by George W. Bush and his Quebec MPs can't be trusted to speak up for the interests of Quebecers, Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe charged yesterday.

"Like Mr. Bush's Republicans, Stephen Harper's Conservatives lobby for the free distribution of firearms, for censorship, and they would like to withdraw the acquired rights of women (on abortion). ... It is that ideology that Stephen Harper would like to impose without reserve on Canada and on Quebec in obtaining a majority."

What a complete wanker.

I predict the BLOC will lose many seats this go round.

Free distribution of firearms? Where do I join the lineup?

But seriously, what planet is this guy from?

makes perfect sense - why do you think that Harper called an election?

"Like Mr. Bush's Republicans, Stephen Harper's Conservatives lobby for the free distribution of firearms, for censorship, and they would like to withdraw the acquired rights of women (on abortion). ... It is that ideology that Stephen Harper would like to impose without reserve on Canada and on Quebec in obtaining a majority."

What a complete wanker.

I predict the BLOC will lose many seats this go round.

Posted by: ldd at September 8, 2008 12:31 PM

It's been said many times the Bloc is vulnerable, but what's your complaint about the reference to abortion rights? Wouldn't it be fair to say that the majority of Tory party MPs, and rank and file members, are ardently pro-life, and would like to place legal restrictions on access to abortions and certainly to eliminate public funding of abortions?

Dion...cutting back on cow farts for the environment!read DMB latest column for a good chuckle.

"Wouldn't it be fair to say that the majority of Tory party MPs, and rank and file members, are ardently pro-life, and would like to place legal restrictions on access to abortions and certainly to eliminate public funding of abortions?"

No. A small minority are. That is why Harper has worked for the last decade to take it off the table. It's also why the liberals and their media team (as in the MSM) have worked so tirelessly to keep it going.

Problem is, voters are 18 and up and no longer believe in the boogeyman hiding under the bed.

David

Didn't see that one in the Conservative platform.

Conservative minority: not the same thing.

This election is going to break the Liberals financially. A minority Conservative government will be able to act as a majority government because the Liberals will not be able to afford to bring down the government. They will also pay a large political price for taking Canadians back to the polls again; therefore, S.Harper can not be any clearer when he says he is looking for a mandate to govern from the Canadian people.

That being said, I think Canadians are beginning to realize this and may give the Conservatives the majority they are looking for.

Ironically a Conservative majority may be the only thing that can save the Liberal party from itself.

If memory serves M. Duceppe was a member of the Communist party not that long ago. I'd like to see the BQ crash and burn along with their brethren in the LPC. Jack and Lizzie for co-opposition leaders!

Aren't Duceppe and Dion both "former marxists"? Isn't that a bit like calling yourself a "former short guy" or a "former amputee"? I mean, does that stuff really go away?

Occam,

Horowitz or why I'd say the answer is yes.

@ David 12:41 p.m.

..generalize much there?

Just a thought.

I hope the Conservatives throw into their platform a committment to end the $1.75/vote/year allowance that the parties get. I would love to hear all of the other parties argue as to why that would be a bad idea.

:)

Until Ontarians (more specifically, Torontonians) realize that the state cannot make them rich, there's some doubt about the numbers.

There's only one answer for those who tell you ‘all policians are the same.'

Just say, ‘In that case, vote for the party that promises to spend the least amount of your money.'

I've come to the conclusion a long time ago that I only trust one person with my money ... and that's me.

Any wacky schemes like the Green Shift and the marxist liberation theology base of the NDP, I'd be suspicious of.

Still, the NDP has a good chance of becoming the official opposition which would not be too bad a development IMHO.

David: "Wouldn't it be fair to say that the majority of Tory party MPs, and rank and file members, are ardently pro-life..."

No, David, it wouldn't be fair to say. If "the majority of Tory party MPs" are "ardently" pro-life, that's news to me. I am ardently pro-life--to the point of taking single pregnant women into my home to support them during their pregnancies--and I don't recall any talk, either pro-life or pro-abortion, in the CPC. I don't recall any time that PMSH has spoken about the abortion issue except to say that he wasn't going to open up a debate about it.

So much constructing of straw wo/men in order to tear them down on the part of people like you and other leftie moonbats. You know when a party/side is out of ideas because they lob lies around like there's no tomorrow.

I'm just hoping that enough Canadians have their BS antennae up, because there's a lot that being lobbed around too.

Newsflash to Gilles Duceppe, GWB is not running for office any more, he is retiring by completing two terms in office. John McCain is making a run for POTUS currently.

GWB is not running for election in Canada, nor does he have dual citizenship!

Moreover, the Tories have scuttled Bill C-484 as if someone threw a fresh placenta into shark infested waters. So if the Tories were angling for the "pro-life" vote one would have to be surprised at the mixed messaging. Ken Epp where are you? If that wasn't a patently baited deck clearing event after Stephan Dion's 'where do you stand on abortion?' question, one would have to be deaf, dumb and blind.

As for the 'free distribution of arms' we already have that, it is known as gangland violence of a reported 900 groups across Canada. I await Conservative MPs to handout firearms and ammunition so we can target practice, as gangland violence grips the uber-metropolitan areas of Canada for control of the illicit drug trade.

As I recall the Hell's Angel's and the Rock Machine were having quite a shoot 'em up some time ago in Quebec.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden(Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

Stephen Harper is a mental discipline colossus and the last conservative in the world to take anything for granted.

His supporters are well advised to do the same.

The MSM concern me much more than the Liberals (Harper has to fight both). They are strangely silent at this hour, perhaps tuckered out after almost a week of fabricating and repeating smears against Sarah Palin. Or perhaps not.

Focus, focus, focus.

David. If this is that, then that leads to ... something unrelated. Please provide evidence to support your statement "(w)ouldn't it be fair to say that the majority of Tory party MPs, and rank and file members, are ardently pro-life, and would like to place legal restrictions on access to abortions and certainly to eliminate public funding of abortions?" IOW name names.

How many times do you, and other Liberals, have to be told - CPC will not open abortion debate, period. Check out PMBs on abortion - they were overwhelmingly brought up by LIBERALS.

David, move on to actual campaign/party issues and platforms, will you. There's lots of stuff, in their actual platforms, to comment on.

An aside, I hear the opposition parties are objecting to Harper's touchy feely, I'm a family man, fuzzy vest ads. I paraphrase it as such - "how dare Mr Harper show who he really is, rather than the caricature of him we have created."

Quite pitiful really. I stand by my prediction that a number of things must align for Harper to secure majority (Layton wakes up and realizes he needs/can take vote from Liberals, not Tories; Lizzy May throws support behind Grits; Dion's hearing problem is seen as a listening problem, etc).

I see no way, period, he can win 180+ seats. More likely a larger minority, or possibly a slim majority.

I'm conflicted. I want Mr. Harper to win a majority but I desperately want Stephane Dion to remain leader of the Liberal party!.

A lead in all polls.

Stephen Harper you magnificent bast ard.

David,

I'll have to agree with the others. There are fiscal conservatives who vote for the CPC as well as social conservatives. As soon as people like you see this you will stop torpedoing our chances of getting a majority.

Sincerely,

Shamrock,

I'm not a Layton shill but I wonder if his strategy is to act like the opposition in waiting by focusing his fire on the Tories.

Criticizing the government is a better way to get MSM attention than bashing Professor Dion.

If the MSM microphones are in Layton's face everyday he starts to look like the real opposition leader and the Liberals start to look like a goofy third party led by an incompetent. This erodes the temptation felt by NDP voters to flee to the Liberals to stop Harper.

I'm so sick of the left bias in the media. Why is this allowed to continue? Isn't news supposed to be fact and opinions for columns and editorials? Or am I just naive, and theres nothing that can be done.

David,

I'll have to agree with the others. There are fiscal conservatives who vote for the CPC as well as social conservatives.

Posted by: Jon at September 8, 2008 1:49 PM

Okay, ... so according to just about every reply here, my assumption is totally wrong!!! Pro-lifers are NOT a majority in the Tory Party, either the rank and file or its parliamentary delegation. Fine. I stand corrected.

So, ... by deduction, ... I guess the official policy position of the Tory Party is that it's pro-choice, in that it doesn't seek to place any legislative restrictions on access to abortions, or to the public funding of that procedure, be it in hospitals or clinics. Is that right?

I think Steven Harper and conservative party will win a majority, "if they stick to the issues that are effecting Canadians in Canada".

If they get off on the MSM agenda, they will win but with a minority government. It will put the Liberals in debt and make it harder for them to pay the debts racked up.

They will have to have a leadership review. I do believe that Bob Rea will win the leadership
position. Then it is a whole new ballgame.

Ezra watch, day umpteen.
Still no CPC candidate announced for Medicine Hat.

I believe that the CPC has not outlined a position re pro/anti life. PMSH says it's not on the program, so why not leave it at that. Not the number one concern of voters, one would hope.

I shudder to think of Bob Rae as PM. I suspect the voters in Ontario have long enough memories to deny the Liberals any seats with him as leader.

ok yeah ... so by deduction... we paint all with a broad brush..yeah, yeah that's the ticket...

*Sigh*
This is what you get when you're stuck on stupid.
It's only a fools 'official' position these days.

Psst, David. We have the choice between the "wallet lightening party", the "big brother lurking around in and around your bedroom, business, computer, etc." party or any number of smaller parties (referred to as "extremist nutjobs.") People have become quite good at being in denial about this simple fact in order to rationalize voting for anyone who has a chance at forming the government.

I'm from Ont.; from what I have seen one should never underestimate the gullibility of most Ontarians

Rich:

So, Ontarians believe somebody else is better qualified to make their spending decisions for them?

If, as some are predicting, this election will be about the economy, that would seem to be the No. 1 question Ontarians have to answer.

Especially when they say ‘politicians, they're all the same.'

Bart F. I agree that is Layton's strategy. I'm simply saying it's flawed. By representing himself as alternative to Harper as PM, he is setting himself up as Opposition alternative to Dion.

Unfortunately, by trying to raise doubts about Harper's fitness as PM, people who change their vote from Conservative, will go Liberal not NDP.

There are very few (insignificant)Tory voters who would change over to NDP.

As for Liberals voters now, they already don't like/mistrust Harper's leadership, so his message won't have resonance with them.

Dion must tell Canadians he is applying for job as opposition leader, rather than PM. This is tough, because it sounds kind of defeatist.

Mr Layton, while criticizing Harper (this is expected, he is the incumbent PM), should present his credentials to left of centre voters as a true environmentalist. He must contrast his program with Dion's, which he can say is simply a tax grab under the guise of environmental policy.

He must argue Dion's policy contains no provisions or plans to reduce emissions and/or spur the development of alternative fuel technologies, which is the only way we can realistically reduce emissions and pollution. Harper is doing that right now, so he will be beneficiary of Grit votes.

Layton needs to go after that constituency, lest the Liberals reverse engineer his approach into vote for themselves, for reasons described above.

While arguing that he should be PM, he must create a subtle undercurrent of his party's fitness as true opposition, rather than abstaining 43 times.

This flaw in his strategy is already being discussed (Norman Spector this morning on Bill Good for instance), so look for Mr Layton to fine-tune his approach.

I wish him well; IMO the NDP are far better positioned to be effective opposition, rather than opposition for sake of power approach of Grits.

David. "So, ... by deduction, ... I guess the official policy position of the Tory Party is that it's pro-choice, in that it doesn't seek to place any legislative restrictions on access to abortions, or to the public funding of that procedure, be it in hospitals or clinics. Is that right?"

What is it you don't understand? Regardless of view of rank and file, party position is debate on abortion will not be reopened. Period. Just because some people have this or that view within a party doesn't make it policy.

Or is the Green party a 9/11 denial party? Are the Liberals an anti-US party. Is the NDP an anti-Semitic party?

Spare us the noise and fallacious logic.

You know, it wouldn't surprise me at all that one factor in Harper's decision to call an election is the timing of the US election.

I can see PMSH siting in his office thinking to himself: US LANDSLIDE = PC LANDSLIDE.

Doug:

You can?

set you free
yup...and as evidence:- Bob Rae, David Miller, McGuinty, Bob Rae II, etc.

I'd say Harper has the small business vote in S.Ont. outside T.O.

This makes it the best chance for a CPC majority.

Lord knows the WEST wants it.

Rich:

Oh, I don't doubt there's a good chance a landslide will happen.

The only thing I was questioning Doug's apparent mind-reading abilities.

free, it's called 'the protest vote'

The MSM (here and the US) are going to fall all over themselves to make damn sure that no conservative is elected to office, with over the top lies, distortions, fairy tales, etc.

I think the time has finally arrived that the MSM consuming public is about the tell the MSM to go f*&^k themselves by voting conservative.

Campaigns run in phases....if they run to plan then they will run in 2 or three phases.

Con Phase 1

Kinder gentler PMSH...makes attacking him so negatively more difficult. Calling him a liar will be difficult when his numbers are high, they'll need to back it up.

Saying someone is controlling is a difficult argument. Most Canadians would like to think their PM is "in control"...you need to demonstrate why this is an issue.

So phase one bulletproofs the PM and includes him running on his record. Likely as an accomplishment a day.

Phase II. Start rolling out new initiatives, to show there is some direction....have surrogates answer the nastiness from the other guys. Hold back on the new initiatives if the Liberal campaign begins to implode as some suspect, under resourced, under staffed, under motivated...they would have to catch lightning in a bottle to avoid a major major embarresment. I can't tell you what it is, just that the conditions for it exist....kind of like any natural disaster predicton, the conditions are there it is simply a matter of time.

Phase III close the deal. Depending on how the first two phases go, it is either new intiatives, hammering home the positive of leadership in tough times or a negative contrast to the other guy. If either of the two it will be a majority, if the last we are talkng minority.

This all of course precludes major dinosaur eruptions or well founded corruption allegations.

Quebecers have decided that they would be better off with an English PM who understands them and has credibility with the West rather than yet another native son, especially one they dont trust.

Ontario suburbs will return to their home base of small c conservtism.....depending on the NDP in Toronto you may actually get one or two conservative ridings in the 416, but I wouldnt count on it and I wouldnt sweat it, they need to learn. NDP surge and Tories get seats in TO, come on Jack!

The two political cartoons in Journal de Montreal are a hoot today as well.
They've got Harper (as a knuckle dragging, hairy back neanderthal, btw), knocking the crap out of all the pansies, er parties in the main ring.

Too funny -the BLOC is wearing the appropriate fascists face mask, Taliban-jackman -always stuck on the ropes trying to attack Harper from behind, dijon is a twisted green pretzel under Harper's foot, whining about not hitting people with glasses.

hee hee

David,

The CPC has no positon on this subject as there is no subject. The court ruled.

Last election, Harper clearly stated on live TV that there would be no legislation and the fact that the CPC went so far as to squash a PRIVATE members bill of any pro-life leanings illustrates that there is no position.

Harper knows damn well it's electoral suicide. This is why Steffie "harper keeps lying about my policies" hypocrite Dion keeps dragging it up with his media friends. That and useful idiots like you.

I hav been waiting for Dion to explain to this old taxpayer just how the "green shift will be good for me" I am still waiting anyway reminded me of a joke....
Replacement windows
Last year I replaced all the windows in my house with new, energy efficent low-e windows. Today I got a call from the owner of the company that installed them. He informed me that it has been a year since the windows were replaced and that he still had not recieved any money, heloooo..........your salesman told me that these windows would pay for themselves in a year..helooo
it's been a year!....silence on the other end of the line I hung up I bet he felt stupid.
cheers Bubba

Doug,

You've been listening to too many nutcase, tin-hat conspiracy theorists.

What's the frequency kenneth?

David,

The CPC has no positon on this subject as there is no subject. The court ruled.

Posted by: Warwick at September 8, 2008 3:19 PM

Very well, that amounts, by default at least, to a pro-choice policy. Right?

.... so by default, "STUCK ON STUPID" is the real problem here then?

Or could be; he doesn't want it and she does?

Don't forget, the eagerly awaited reappearance of the Liberal Mole...

183 seats?

Well, I suppose a Liberal collapse leading to increased CPC support is possible sometime before election day. However, I doubt that this poll accurately reflects the current mood. Harper's prediction of an increased minority government is consistent with other, current polling data.

One of the things that I will want to see is how well the Liberals do outside Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. Although the combined population of Canada's three largest cities is a significant political demographic, I think it will interesting to reexamine the question of how "national" the Liberals are as a Party outside of these cities after the current election.

Latest Nanos poll taken Aug20 to 27th/08

(LP 35%, CP 33%, NDP 17%, BQ 8%, GP 7%).

Nikonthenumbers.com

sheesh, david - don't you understand basic reasoning? No position means: No position.

The political parties did not take a position on abortion. The courts did (1988). The courts are, legally, not part of the legislature; they are not political. Therefore, what a court says is NOT the policy of a political party.

Because the Supreme Court of Canada ruled a certain way, does not make it a policy of the Liberals, or the Conservatives, or the NDP or the Bloc or the Green, or the Communist or the Marxist-Leninist..and any other political party. It makes it LAW.

stephen - nice outline. Yes, I think that there might be a seat or two in Toronto for the Conservatives. I think Glenn's outline of yesterday, in another thread, was a good one. He predicted quite a loss for the Liberals and a rise in NDP numbers. We'll see.

Hugger:

Interesting change since Aug. 27, don't you think?

"Just say, ‘In that case, vote for the party that promises to spend the least amount of your money.'"

Didn't we do that last time? And what happened? Record breaking spending by Harper. Record breaking spending on self-interested polling to boot.

Maybe Harper's New Liberal is better than Classic Liberal, but it is NOT conservative.

And DO NOT give me any crap about "incrementalism". There was NO need to break spending records. There was NO need to break his promise with record breaking corporate welfare (the Ford flip flop is ghastly and he's lucky the media are ignoring it).

I remember when Harper won and all the conservative bloggers and commenters went on and on about how they will keep Harper's foot to the ideological fire. The fire's been put out by too much kool-aid.

Atacl:

Any suggestions on who to put your X beside instead?

Living in a time warp, hugger?

The fight between the 'left' and the 'right' or the Liberals/NDP/Bloc and the Conservatives is really about class.

The Liberals/left have since WWII moved themselves into an upper class, made up of 'urban professionals', most funded by the govt (civil service, media, education). They view themselves as an elite intellectual and superior class, who are, by nature, entitled to Rule over the peasants.

The peasants are always victims, impoverished, uneducated etc etc. They are as well, 'rednecks', ignorant, etc. Immigrants to the country are rapidly moved into ghettos, isolated and funded to remain 'as they were' in return for their votes.
There is no middle class in this scenario.

The Conservatives are the party of the middle class. A class that is self-made, that does not see itself as entitled or others as entitled.

Here's a picture and article that says it all:

http://neoneocon.com/2008/09/08/its-the-class-war-stupid/

It's talking about the US election and the contrast between McCain-Palin and Obama-Bidin. Take a look at the drawing! It's perfect!
Then, read the analysis. Also very astute.

SYF,

The poster is a plant with a similar IQ.

ET, above is right, the left think they have right to rule the middle class having tricked us into emptying our pockets into their mouths all the time. When are the rest of us going to wake up anyways?

.... so by default, "STUCK ON STUPID" is the real problem here then?

Posted by: ldd at September 8, 2008 3:33 PM

Or could be; he doesn't want it and she does?

Posted by: ldd at September 8, 2008 3:36 PM

Perhaps you can explain why it's stupid to ask for clarity on such an issue? As for your he/she remark, I suppose you can interpret that one too while you're at it.

Nice link ET. "Popcorn and beer." It's the same Liberal attitude both sides of the border.

"The Conservatives are the party of the middle class. A class that is self-made, that does not see itself as entitled or others as entitled.

Here's a picture and article that says it all:

http://neoneocon.com/2008/09/08/its-the-class-war-stupid/"

Posted by: ET at September 8, 2008 4:08 PM

Except that the Republicans have just chosen a man from a wealthy family who owns so many houses he's lost count of how many. And before that they chose a nominee from the uppercrust of elite political and wealthy families in the United States!

That doesn't let the Democrats off the hook and you may be right about them, but saying the Republicans are any less upper class and elitist is hyperbolic partisan piffle.

david - you aren't asking for clarity. Clarity has been provided; namely - abortion is not a political issue. The Conservatives have NO policy on it. The issue has been decided by the Supreme Court. What further clarity do you want?

ETWTF- no, you don't understand the definition of a 'middle class'. It has nothing to do with current wealth. The defining attribute of a member of the middle class is that it, as a class, is open to membership. You can move in; you can equally move out.

A member of the middle class is someone who has done it on their own. They may now have multiple homes; they may now be very wealthy. But, they achieved this on their own.

Furthermore, a key attribute of a member of the middle class is that there is no sense of entitlement, no sense that he is entitled to Rule over others. No sense of superiority in birth, intellect, value.

The Republicans have made it very clear by their choice of McCain and esp. Palin; and in their rhetoric - they are against the 'Washington elite', which is a 'code-name' for that elistist class. The Democrats are shocked that anyone would select for governance an 'ordinary citizen'.

Again - this has nothing to do with wealth; a middle class person can become, on his own, very wealthy.

Interesting change since Aug. 27, don't you think?
Posted by: set you free at September 8, 2008 3:55 PM

Almost amazing don't you think?

I remember a black comedian telling a tale once where he used the line, "Somebodies lyin'"

The TV broadcasters have rejected May as a participant in the leader's debates.

I suspect that she would either be seen as an appendage of Dion, speaking 'for' or 'as' him or even, bleeding votes away from him.

I've said it many times before, that I think it is completely undemoratic to have the Bloc as a national party. Why? Because it isn't. It makes governing Canada, as a democracy, extremely difficult. That's because it, as a local party only available to people in Quebec, becomes by default, their party regardless of its stated policies. Since Quebec is also allotted 75 House seats, this is a substantial number. [I note that the West, with the same population as Quebec, has eleven fewer seats].

And Dion has now come up with an 'I'm A Victim' explanation of his inability to speak English. He's now saying that he has a hearing problem. That's new; we've never heard that before.

The only problem is - this would also have affected his ability to speak French. It hasn't.

I suggest the real reason is that he left it too late to learn English, and he has no linguistic ability.

Living in a time warp, hugger?
Posted by: irwin daisy at September 8, 2008 4:07 PM

Umm, it does take a few days to compile and publish the stats I expect. But ya, I have a special relationship with the space/time continuum. Something to do with Truth, Honour, Democracy and the subversion of those lofty concepts.

ET: "A member of the middle class is someone who has done it on their own. They may now have multiple homes; they may now be very wealthy. But, they achieved this on their own."

Like George W. Bush?!?!?! or McCain?!?!?! Pray tell, how did they achieve their uber-wealth "on their own"????

ET: "Furthermore, a key attribute of a member of the middle class is that there is no sense of entitlement, no sense that he is entitled to Rule over others. No sense of superiority in birth, intellect, value."

Where on earth has ANYONE defined "class" in that way? This may very well be an attribute of Democrats vs. Republicans, but it has nothing to do with any class definition. You are simply making that up because it makes it feel better voting Republican.

ET: "The Republicans have made it very clear by their choice of McCain and esp. Palin; and in their rhetoric - they are against the 'Washington elite', which is a 'code-name' for that elistist class."

By picking the multimillionaire son of a multimillionaire former President and former Senator in 1999, both of whom were the upper crust of Washington elite? And then by picking one of the longest-serving Washington insiders they could possibly pick - who can't remember how many houses he owns (and no - McCain is NOT a self-made wealthy man, it is inherited and married wealth) and says he endorses pretty much everything the President did in the last 8 years and voted with his party over 90% of the time? This is how they try to distance themselves the Washington elite?

McCain himself in his speech last week said he has been a part of every major national security or defence decision since he became a senator. How more "inside" could you get short of being the majority/minority leader???

This is what I don't get about blind partisanship. Putting policies aside (meaning only looking at leadership and experience), McCain is clearly the better choice. Biden is as much an insider as McCain if not more so, so the Democrats are certainly not better. So what make stuff up? He's a stand up leader who's own real story beats out the others. So why invent attributes for McCain? Why can't Stuck on Stupid partisans say, yeah, he has his faults but he is a good choice, the better choice, even the far better choice.

Stuck on Stupid, indeed. And the rest of us suffer from the vitriolic blind partisanship.

Hugger, I guess we believe the polls we choose to believe. The mind sees what it wants. Do you really want a Fiberal government?

Be careful what you wish for; you might get one.

For those who remember "Frank" magazine's day in the sun:

All we allowed to call him the "Puffster", or is that verboten?

and he has no linguistic ability.
Posted by: ET at September 8, 2008 5:15 PM

I am very limited in that aspect too ET. Does that make me unworthy? I see shortcomings in Dion but do we need to make his command of a second language a focal point?

At this point in our space/time continuum his largest fault is lack of political savvy. Mr. Harper doesn't have that problem. He has a problem with integrity and subversion of Democratic process. Just cause the Libs do it, doesn't make it ok.

Actually, ET, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) did not decide the abortion issue. It struck down the 1988 (I think) law, but left it up to Parliament to draft another one. I believe the Conservatives made a stab at it and the law didn't pass.

As a result, Canada is the only democratic country in the world with no law concerning abortion: there is no protection of any kind for the unborn human being in this country, for the full nine months of gestation. E.g., If a doctor should perform an abortion in Canada before the birth, at a full nine months, he/she would be perfectly within his/her rights to do so.

By and large, the left-wing parties in this country are quite satisfied with this state of affairs, as are a good number of Conservatives. But, abortion is most definitely a political issue and should be decided by our elected representatives. However, it’s such an incendiary issue, all the political parties are quite happy (cowards) to hide behind the SCC and say the issue is out of their hands.

It’s not.

That said, the Conservatives have made it quite clear that this issue is not a priority.

The mind sees what it wants. Do you really want a Fiberal government?

Be careful what you wish for; you might get one.
Posted by: Tim at September 8, 2008 5:26 PM

Tim, I think that the wide spread that we see in the various polls makes them all very questionable. I have come to suspect their purpose is to manipulate the opinions and votes of the electorate.

What I wish for is a Democratically elected government that respects you and I, represents the wishes of individual ridings and the much touted principles of the will of the People.

As things are now, what we will get is either the Liberals or CPC based on who runs the best medicine show.

Hugger: "I am very limited in that aspect too ET. Does that make me unworthy? I see shortcomings in Dion but do we need to make his command of a second language a focal point?

As I pointed out in another thread, "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander". The Quebec press pilloried various Conservative candidates like Bob Stanfield, Joe Clark, and John Crosbie because they weren't fluent in French. If the French (20% of mother tongues) feel they're justified in DEMANDING the PM can speak French intelligibly, then English Canadians have every right to demand a PM who can address them in their own language without a translator required.

And it's not like this is an unprecedented request. PET, Bouchard, Levesque, Parizeau - all of them were francophones first, but all spoke English quite well. Why does Dion merit a pass?

I've noticed a trend. Many people try to take issues such as abortion, fiscal policy, social policy, and cubbyhole them into black and white issues, like they are a digital 0 or 1. They are not.

Take abortion for example (just talking here folks). Some people are against abortion for any reason, some others think people should have abortion on demand, anytime they want, as many times as they want. Those are the polar opposite issues. The vast majority of people are in between somewhere. For instance, they may personally object to abortion, but don't feel they have the right to, or don't want to, dictate for others.

Some people may feel abortion on demand is fine, but have problems with late term abortions (yes, they do happen in Canada every day).

And, there are many other positions in between.

The same goes for fiscal policy - there are many shades of gray between black and white (total government or no government at all - views shared by very few IMO).

It is intellectually lazy IMO to try to take complicated issues with wide ranging thoughts and viewpoints, and turn them into yes or no arguments.

The discussion re: AGW fall into this fallacy more often than not, I've noticed.

Before David and ET WTF go nuts on me, all parties and leaders do it. Why, because it's way easier to explain.

We don't think deeply enough about issues that affect us and our society. I believe that very strongly. Sorry, can't provide definitive evidence, it's just my opinion.

I can't do true justice to this idea of nuances and complications to political positions because, well, that idea itself is gray and not black and white.

The fact that Duff referred to any poll which would seem to be good for Conservatives, is of course suspect.
I would assume the reason Duff would do so, would be so the media can IMMEDIATELY start to 'inform' the public of the 'catastophic' possibility of a 'scary' conservative majority.

hugger - yes, I think that Dion's inability to speak English is an important political issue. That's because the majority of Canadians, over 80%, speak English. And only English.

It is elitist to assume governance over a population when you cannot speak their language. Such behaviour was common in medieval Europe where the upper class governed within French and Latin. Never English or German or...

I also reject Dion's current strategy of defining himself as a Victim, claiming that he has a hearing problem (unproven) and that this is the reason he can't speak English. As I said, if this were true - and the fact that it's never, ever been mentioned before makes it unlikely - then this would also have affected his abilities in French. It hasn't.

lookout - yes, I think your history outline is correct. The Senate rejected Mulroney's bill outlawing abortion.

But I wonder. I haven't come to a conclusion but I feel that abortion is not a political issue. It's moral and in some areas of life, I think that the state has no right to interfere. I don't know that I'd want a political representative to make such a private decision for me. Personally, I'm against abortion; but that's only personally. I don't know if I can judge another person. It's a reality that illegal abortions were killing women. And, no matter what the law says, women would always be trying to abort unwanted children.

The way abortions are used now, as a kind of birth control - well, I'm against that. I'm also against the idea that the fetus is the 'private property' of the woman. The father is involved. Equally, and I mean equally, so is the fetus. So, it's a terrible situation and I don't know if there is a 'just' final decision.

hugger: "As things are now, what we will get is either the Liberals or CPC based on who runs the best medicine show."

Well then. It's in the bag. It's clear that the CPC are the ones who will run "the best medicine show."

Stephane Dion and his party can't even start off their campaign running, let alone run a medicine show.

Why does Dion merit a pass?
Posted by: KevinB at September 8, 2008 5:53 PM

The best answer I can give you, is that the Liberal party chose Dion as their leader knowing his problem with the English language. That is their burden to bear politically. As an English Canadian, I understand your sentiments. I also understand that the challenges of diversity in our country are not unlike that which other countries experience. What may set us a notch higher is how we all deal with it.

If Canadians can get past being manipulated on regional and linguistics lines, we will be a stronger Nation.

I'm curious as to what would happen if the courts were to say that the libs were not allowed to use the greenshift thingy and ruled in Jennifers favor during the course of the election. Would there be repercussions ala Adscam? It probably cost Martin the election and this could be the tipping point to give PMSH a majority.
Any legal beagles that have an opinion?

Posted by: ET at September 8, 2008 6:01 PM

ET, honestly, is it really a Political issue or is it a personal issue? As I said in a reply to another poster the Libs choose him and will have to live with his language challenge. I certainly don’t think it was smart politically. I also think it was very questionable. So much so that I wonder sometimes if they actually want to form a government at this time given current economic realities.
Elitism is a hallmark of governance. Those that govern, and their prodigy who follow in their footsteps, increasingly assume they have divine right. Democracy provides something of a reality check. If Democracy is circumvented via medicine show tactics and demagoguery, what are we to do? Piss and moan and vent on the internet?

Shamrock:

I don't know why you think I'd jump all over you: you've laid out the issue of black and white partisanship quite nicely. I understand why the politicians do it - they want power and those sweet pensions and health benefits, and they want to make sure the other guys don't. And we the sheeple buy it, so who can blame them. We get the politicians we deserve.

But while I can understand a bit from a practical electioneering view why the politicians do it, I don't understand why ordinary supporters - and the partisan kool-aid drinking monkeys here are certainly no worse than the Liberal and Dipper monkeys - not only automatically and unquestioningly adopt all of the talking points but also feel the need to invent, fabricate things about their preferred candidate and their opponent for fear of giving or losing even the slightest advantage.

While the ET-type lies are common, the worst by far are those conservatives who were saying they would rather vote Hillary than McCain when they were trying to get Romney/Huckabee/Thompson elected or those Democrats who said they vote McCain instead of Obama while trying to get Clinton elected... only to claim now that McCain or Obama as the case may be is the perfect candidate and the other the most dangerous candidate.

Noticed that Grits can now use, under license, Green Shift trademark. I kind of glad to see the end of that one; it really had no bearing on the election. The issue is not the use of a trademark, but a bad policy that simply shifts wealth from one region to another, while doing zip for the environment.

I don't think Dion's lack of English skills is worth commenting on, hearing problem or not. The voters can make their own assessment without peanut gallery comments, IMO.

That Segma LaPresse poll seems a rogue to me. It's nowhere near others and their seat projection of 180 CPC seats, based on 43% of vote, doesn't make sense to me.

IMO, it will take about 43% votes for Tory to give them slim majority. Their vote is simply not as efficient as Liberals, where they have solid blocks of votes in large urban areas, and are nowhere in other parts. This means they can get piles of seats with a fairly low share of popular vote.

Chretien ruled with iron hand upon receiving 38% of tallied vote (under 25% of eligible voters if you do the math). The CPC vote is more evenly spread out, and while this possibly gives them better national scope, they need a higher percentage than Liberals to obtain majority.

That is, and will be a tremendous challenge. Then again, Dion and Layton are not likely inspiring either their supporters or potential voters so far, so we will see.

I concur with ET and others, I personally am against abortion but in the end I feel it really isn't my business. I also have concerns about the fathers rights[sarc on] but I do not see how they can be accommodated. (I would rather focus the fathers rights[sarc on] energy on issues that can be fought ie...not giving babies to mothers in jail when their is a father available:)

In a country of individual choice there is no collective responsibility for one persons act ie... abortion; so the fight should be to stop public funding of these procedures, that is the true embarrassment. The typical leftard successfully implicates "society" for the consequences of the individual's choices, or as they say "having your cake and eating it to".

I'd say Harper gave a hint of a coming campaign promise tonite in Regina.

He noted the Conservatives "started" with a $100 month child tax benefit.

"It's a reality that illegal abortions were killing women." - ET

One question.

How many?

You hear this a lot from abortion supporters - "Oh no, we can't have women getting back-alley abortions! They die!" But what's the number? How does it compare to the number of pregnancies terminated every year? Especially in the second and third trimesters?

I suspect the number was very low. Poland banned abortion except for strict circumstances in 1993. There are now fewer than 1000 reported abortions in that country every year, down from 200,000/yr in the 70s and 100,000/yr in the 80s.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-poland.html

So where are all the deaths from these desperate women getting these back-alley abortions? They must have exploded in Poland. Surely we'd hear about it?

*chirp chirp*

A poll showing a huge majority for the Conservatives is just what the media wants to put out.

Harper won't co-operate with them by telling them he expects or seeks a majority. This is their way of attempting to interfere with how people vote and to encourage the "strategic voting" they like to yak about to prevent a majority.

It could be a rogue poll but it could also be exactly what will happen. The only thing the Liberals have going for them is the support of the entire media in this country and thanks to the blogosphere, more people are onto them.

Don Newman is looking pretty drawn and concerned, a good sign for the Harper Conservatives.

In answer to your question, Ian - I/we don't know. Statistics weren't kept and after all, many deaths could be given a different cause, just as many AIDS deaths in Africa are defined as 'pneumonia' or whatever ..rather than the real cause.

But I think there are a few facts to think about. Any illegal medical procedure is going to be, heavily, risk-laden because of lack of equipment, care, etc etc. To say that there were no deaths from illegal abortion would be incorrect; to say that there were no lasting effects from inadequate care would be incorrect. That's all we can say. We can't put a number on it.

Women are always going to try to terminate pregnancies and have always done so. A major problem now, with the mantra that "It's a Woman's Choice' is that it has become a form of contraception. It isn't. It can be very harmful to the woman.

Morally - it's difficult. Whatever one feels personally, and I'm personally against abortion, - this can't be a universal 'Truth'.

As I said, there are three lives to consider: the fetus, the father, the mother. I have no idea how to deal with all three in a universal or societal sense. I can only deal with those issues for myself. And not for anyone else. I simply can't make the decision for anyone else, or judge them.

"What I wish for is a Democratically elected government that respects you and I, represents the wishes of individual ridings and the much touted principles of the will of the People."

Then, you should vote Conservative.

After nearly 80 years of unbroken rule, the Liberals have created something other than democracy. Collusion between the Liberal party, the bureaucracy, justice, senate and state media is fully entrenched, whether they are in power, or in opposition.

It will take a Conservative majority, a lot of will and some time to correct this Liberal tyranny at the federal level.

For true democracy in this country, I hope you believe your own words.

How about a woman's right to choose . . . to keep going in her car at a STOP sign, to drive as fast as she likes, to avoid paying her taxes, to abuse her children or husband, to . . .

In Robert Bolt's play, A Man for All Seasons, Thomas More said, “This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you [his son in law, Roper] cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?”

It’s squeamish and illogical to think that women have a duty to abide by the other laws of this country—isn’t that often interference with their own choice?—while being entirely exempt from their responsibility for the children they conceive or the deliberate killing of those children?

Yes, there are understandable reasons for women to choose abortion—as there are understandable reasons for people to steal, commit adultery, kill, bear false witness, etc. However, if we excuse these serious shortcomings—which, due to “victimitis”, we now do all too regularly—we seriously debase our moral currency.

ET and Indiana Homez, could it be that your view on abortion and the law encompasses a double standard? I think so, but your views are perfectly in sync with those of all the political parties in this country.

Oh oh Canada.

Sorry, my above post is missing my first paragraph. Here's the complete post:

ET, I appreciate your comments. However, I cannot reconcile your and Indiana Homez's idea that, though personally opposed to abortion, you cannot support the state “interfering” in a woman's right to choose . . . the deliberate, violent killing of the unborn human being in her womb (and at taxpayer expense—in PRIVATE, medical clinics).

How about a woman's right to choose . . . to keep going in her car at a STOP sign, to drive as fast as she likes, to avoid paying her taxes, to abuse her children or husband, to . . .
In Robert Bolt's play, A Man for All Seasons, Thomas More said, “This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you [his son in law, Roper] cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?”

It’s squeamish and illogical to think that women have a duty to abide by the other laws of this country—isn’t that often interference with their own choice?—while being entirely exempt from their responsibility for the children they conceive or the deliberate killing of those children?

Yes, there are understandable reasons for women to choose abortion—as there are understandable reasons for people to steal, commit adultery, kill, bear false witness, etc. However, if we excuse these serious shortcomings—which, due to “victimitis”, we now do all too regularly—we seriously debase our moral currency.

ET and Indiana Homez, could it be that your view on abortion and the law encompasses a double standard? I think so, but your views are perfectly in sync with those of all the political parties in this country.

Oh oh Canada.

I choose life.

I agree with whoever said that a Conservative majority would be helpful to the Liberals. They really need a time-out to rebuild. In a minority context their game becomes trying to knock off the government and political posturing, rather than productive governing takes over Parliament. Quite frankly, all of the parties behaved rather badly in the previous minority context. A Conservative majority would provide some breathing space for everyone, allow Liberals time enough to put their house in order, and make for a more civilized governing process. No need for concern re a Conservative majority -- they know that they still need to please most of the people most of the time to stay in office.

David -- My understanding is that the Conservatives do not have an official policy on abortion. It is considered too divisive an issue. Hence, the issue will not be introduced by the caucus under their mandate (minority or majority). Having said that, Harper's position on issue of conscience is that there should be a "free vote". This makes sense to me. I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality. That is why Harper re-introduced the gay marriage question -- the original passage of this bill was not a free vote. Finally, though it is not particularly relevant since we won't see abortion being brought up in the next Parliament -- regardless of who wins by how much -- it is worth noting that MOST Canadians have a problem with late-term abortions. Perhaps at some point in the future we as a society will be brave enough to admit that late term abortions, partial birth abortions, and "genetic terminations" (ala Foothills hostpital) are nothing short of barbaric.

Irwin Daisy:" Collusion between the Liberal party, the bureaucracy, justice, senate and state media is fully entrenched, whether they are in power, or in opposition." -- You forgot to mention Power corporation and the Chinese mafia.

Hugger:

You responded politely, so I'll try to do the same.

OK, let's ignore Dion's inability to speak the same language as the majority of his countrymen. And let's also ignore the question of whether his countrymen are Canadian or French.

Let's get to the most important plank of the Liberal campaign: the "Green Shift", or as those of us with long memories might refer to it, "NEP II". An increasing number of climate scientists are disputing the existence of any link between man-made CO2 and global warming. http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=756766

M. Dion is intent on forcing the one sector of our economy that is growing into bankruptcy ON THE BASIS OF COMPLETELY SPURIOUS SCIENCE.

I don't care whether he speaks English, French, or Urdu; the fact that he swallows the AGW hypothesis hook, line, and sinker, is evidence to me that he not only does not deserve to lead this country, he doesn't deserve to lead a local Boy Scout troop.

LindaL:
"I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality."

Agreed.

"-- it is worth noting that MOST Canadians have a problem with late-term abortions. Perhaps at some point in the future we as a society will be brave enough to admit that late term abortions, partial birth abortions, and "genetic terminations" (ala Foothills hostpital) are nothing short of barbaric."

What is late term? What is partial birth?

Posted by: at September 9, 2008 12:39 AM

LindaL says, "I think it is inappropriate for the state to dictate on issues of morality" and David agrees.

The confusion, double standards, muddled thinking, and ignorance—I’ll fill you in later, David, about the two kinds of abortion you appear to be in the dark about. (BTW, our whole culture conspires to keep the populace ignorant of this crucial and unpleasant issue. “We want to do what we want to do, so don’t inconvenience us with the details that might make us feel uncomfortable.” Also, follow the money. Abortion is big, big business.)

Re “legislating morality”, in case you hadn't noticed, the horse has already left the barn: we do it all the time. Virtually all laws "legislate morality", as they encode those behaviours we, as a society, either approve of or proscribe. The (il)logical conclusion of the above statement is that you disapprove of laws against such things as paedophilia, murder, stealing, graft, fraud, speeding, polygamy (for now), etc. The laws concerning these behaviours all legislate morality.

David, I described late term abortions above: “As a result [of the Supreme Court striking down Canada’s abortion law], Canada is the only democratic country in the world with no law concerning abortion: there is no protection of any kind for the unborn human being in this country, for the full nine months of gestation. E.g., If a doctor should perform an abortion in Canada before the birth, at a full nine months, he/she would be perfectly within his/her rights to do so.”

Partial birth abortion? (Google it, David, and have a look.) Here’s how it’s done (via Google), usually on a later term creature, which looks suspiciously like a baby:

“Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps.

“The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

“The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.

“The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.

“The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.”

“The partial birth abortion has been performed legally in the United States for years. It is neither a ‘rare’ procedure, nor is it done only for babies who are severely deformed or dying. It is, essentially, a variant of the even more common and equally gruesome Dilation and Evacuation (D and E) procedure.”

And you think that legislating morality here is objectionable? E.g., President Bush has been excoriated for vetoing bills to allow this barbaric procedure. (LindaL, we agree on most of this.)

The propaganda and suppression of information about abortion is jealously manipulated by our elites at all levels. In this case, IMO, bring on the “legislation of morality” in order to protect our unborn children.

If that makes me a fanatic, so be it.

KevinB:

Yes, let's ignore the language issue as that furthers nothing really. Criticizing what he says and his policy is fair ball as it is for any political leader.

Given you want to talk about carbon tax etc. I will first say that IMO, announcing that program was probably the dumbest political move I have ever seen. I'll write about something else for a moment then get back to Carbon tax.

Harper accuses the liberals of being tax and spend artists, which is true but so is his pack. GST came from the CP and the Libs were most pleased to inherit it. Obviously. Harper says Dion "said" he would raise the GST back to previous levels. That's not true. I listened to the video being referred to and Dion did not say that. What Harper is saying is untrue.

What's more likely is that Dion's troops intended to use Carbon tax monies for things that the 2% GST cuts were funding.

Posted by: irwin daisy at September 8, 2008 10:14 PM

Hello Irwin,

Re: voting Conservative.

I would have some problems with that, for a number of reasons. Not the least of which being their assault on Democracy and the Democratic process. The most recent examples being the appointments of 4 candidates in Nova Scotia including a twice previously failed candidate to carry the banner in Bill Casey’s riding. Additionally, the parachuting of a candidate into Halton. Then there is the Elizabeth May debate thing. As I write, Harper is the only one I have heard stating his position on that via media interview.

The debate question is a very large one in my view when it comes to measuring what someone does against what they say. Once Democracy is circumvented and the party gets away with it, each time thereafter becomes easier for them until they eventually lose sight of the original principle. This has been a problem during the course of History.

I don’t know about 80 years Irwin, I seem to remember the names of a number of Conservative PM’s but I think I grasp your intent and I don’t totally reject your premise on collusion. I do wonder though just how inclusive it may be? Does it span party lines?

Your use of the word “tyranny” made me smile as it a word that I might employ as well. I don’t think it’s necessarily restricted to the Federal level though.

A last thought. I know the Libs selectively parachute candidates too. Maybe the Outremont, and Orchard experiences taught them something. I doubt it though. When you are born to Rule, you just have the right.

hugger, dion HAS said that he would consider raising the GST

–Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion says he would consider reversing Tory cuts to the goods and services tax if his party wins power.

Dion said he sides with economists who say the cuts to the GST are bad policy and that income tax cuts are a better way to put money in people's pockets.

Toronto Star, Nov 1, 2007

" That's why yesterday, the Liberal leader left the door open to rescinding GST cuts introduced by the minority Conservatives, from 7 per cent to 6 per cent last year and another cut to 5 per cent that will take effect on Jan. 1, 2008.

"We will consider if in our plan we need to revisit the decision of the government about the GST. We'll consider it," Dion told reporters yesterday.

And in the same speech, Dion said:

"We will choose the time where we want to defeat this government. Then Canadians will have two plans. Our plan will be very compelling, very comprehensive, very attractive for Canadians," Dion said."

The point is - he never said that this govt HAD to last until 2009; he himself said that it could be at any time - his choice.

ET, let me add this. Dion is on the record as opposing carbon taxes; he was against it before he was for it. Then upon breaking that promise (liar, liar pants on fire), he said he would not "change a comma" of his plan, which he then changed, at the behest of his candidates.

This highlights Dion's policy dishonesty. He has a lot of nerve calling Harper a liar.

As far as his party history promises goes ....well, enough said.

Posted by: ET at September 9, 2008 2:13 PM

Well ET, thank you for confirming what I wrote.

Harper is saying Dion said he would raise the GST back to 7%. That is untrue. Thus the claim of liar I expect.

Posted by: Shamrock at September 9, 2008 3:26 PM

Dion also reversed himself on the date of withdrawal from Afghanistan. On both of these issues he says he changed his mind. I don't have a razor blade sharp enough to split those hairs.

Many say Mr. Harper and his party lied about income trusts. I believe the CPC stance on this is they changed their mind.

Income Trusts weren't a big issue for me personally, but there has been much said and written on it so I have caught some. Harper won't talk about it, yes / no?? Now that Brent Fullard of Caiti fame is going to run against Flaherty, someone's going to have to talk about it.

Tennis anyone?

Hugger, all I'm saying is people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I understand politicians change their minds, or are forced to by circumstances. It doesn't mean any of them lied.

I was just mirroring back what Dion said.

If he can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Cliche generator off

Posted by: Shamrock at September 9, 2008 7:05 PM

Shamrock, I've heard the have to approach re: Income Trusts a number of times. I guess Fullard and Flaherty will hammer that one out. My money is on Fullard. He has been rather obsessed with the issue for some considerable time.

Beyond that, some people say it's good to be able to change your position after further consideration. I believe that to be true, but on some really important issues one should be very knowledgeable before opening one's mouth in the first place. That's what we expect from politicians and senior bureaucrats. High level government isn't amateur hour.

Soap box still intact and holding.