Not that it should be all that surprising coming from Christy Clarke, but the LiberalMLA-turned-Radio Personality had a writer from the Globe and Mail -- Michael Valpe -- on her CKNW show who compared the Conservatives to Nazi Germany. In the interview, they're talking about how all political parties collect personal information about constituents. But a Jewish man complained to the G&M about receiving a Rosh Hashanah card from the Conservatives; thus, the Conservatives, in having collected information on this particular occasion about this particular Jewish man, are now Nazis. Listen at Monday, September 15, at 12pm; interview starts at ~36minutes, while the quote in question occurs at ~46minutes:

http://www.cknw.com/StationShared/AudioVault.aspx

Was I hearing things or did Mansbridge refer to Dion's prospects as "roadkill" ?

The man has an amazingly good grasp of the situation, methinks....

Is Mansbridge trying to ingratiate himself with the new government? :)

US race now wide open. The financial problems have run Palin off the front page, the economy now the only game in town. Lipstick and my "muslim" faith yesterdays news.

The campaign that handles it best wins the next round and probably the election. McCain and company have the inside track given they are actually not ashamed of capitalism. McCain has to reign in his current over the top attack advertising though, and get specific. Obama cannot be specific unless he declares openly he is a socialist..... which he is.

It will be interesting to see where the polls are a week from now. God help the USA if Obama is actually smart enough to regain the lead with an economic plan. His will involve government. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's problems were caused by Government interference (guarantees). Lehman and Merrill's problems caused by government resistance to allow Long Term Capital to fail in 1998. The "Greenspan put" has come home to roost as it eventually had to. Companies no matter how large must be allowed to fail. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should have failed years ago............. it would have been a lot cheaper for taxpayers and much much healthier in the long run for the economy.

Either that or Obama takes charge and is out in 4 years leaving the same kind of wreckage behind the NDP did here in BC on two widely separated one term long marches. Don't live in Ontario, but I remember no cars on the 401 during business hours during the socialist's reign.

""It's the children's crusade," mocks a veteran Liberal".

The Liberal Party,
Riding on a dionky*.
...-

"Stumbling campaign angers Liberal insiders"
http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/499873
...-

*"Were you ever in Quebec?
Stowing timber on the deck
Where there's a king with a golden crown
Riding on a donkey

chorus:
Hey, ho! Away we go!
Donkey riding, donkey riding
Hey, ho! Away we go!
Riding on a donkey"
(trad.)

Question Period:
Will Dionky Throw Asinine Garth Off The Liberal Donkey?
Will the Three Monkeys of the MSM stand by: mute, blind, handsittingon?
Stay tuned!
...-

"Garth Turner gets caught

CPAC is probably my favourite place to turn for election coverage on television. They do a top job and it is virtually impossible to determine a particular bias towards one ideology or another. The cable channel prides itself on being a straight shooter and when Garth Turner’s campaign seemed to pull a dirty trick on them as revealed by Steve Janke, Peter van Dusen made sure to try to set the record straight.

Garth Turner is of course the Conservative-turned-Independent-turned-Green teaser-turned-Liberal that is never more than a few steps away from controversy. Here is the exchange from CPAC."
http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2008/09/garth-turner-gets-caught/
...-

"Garth Turner turns on Esther Shaye to save himself, but is it too late?

Liberal MP Garth Turner is in a bind. Yesterday, I revealed that a "random encounter" filmed by CPAC might indeed have been staged, since the person who answered the door was none other than the son of Garth Turner's campaign manager, Esther Shaye.

Today, faced with tough questions, Garth Turner seems to abandon Esther Shaye. But will it be enough to satisfy the one person who might otherwise benefit from ejecting Garth Turner from the Liberal Party?

I'm speaking, of course, of Stephane Dion."
http://stevejanke.com/archives/273540.php#idc-container

Commenter stephen p:

The cold bland expressions on Peter van Dusen face as he slowly but efficiently twists the knife into Mr. Turner is something to behold indeed!

Sharo Lem-Sun Media are not cowards.
They use the word: Muslim and more.
They use the words: Black Muslim movement.

""They don't believe they have to adhere by the laws of Canada because they are citizens of another country -- Morocco," Curtis said."

Behold the natural end result of PET's multiculturalism.
...-

"Sect believes in the mind over illnesses"

The parents who were arrested in a dispute over their malnourished infant are members of a sect that believes illness is all in the mind, which can be used to cure the body.

The 9-month-old's parents were charged with obstruction of justice after a dispute at Sick Kids when the 22-year-old mom refused to hand over the infant to doctors and left the hospital with the baby.

The Moorish Science Temple of America was founded in 1913 by Timothy Drew in Newark, N.J. Many of its practices were derived from Muslim observances and the group was a forerunner of the Black Muslim movement.

Drew's central teaching is that blacks were Moorish, of Muslim origin. He advocated a return to Islam as the only means of redemption from racial oppression. The sect also believes African Americans are sovereign Moroccan nationals."
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2008/09/16/6779551-sun.html

Black swans? Where? They's no such a thing as a black swan. Everybody knows that.

"Introduction
When Nassim Taleb talks about the limits of statistics, he becomes outraged. "My outrage," he says, "is aimed at the scientist-charlatan putting society at risk using statistical methods."

AGW/CC? Goreacle? Suezooky? Citoyen Dionky?
...-

"Statistical and applied probabilistic knowledge is the core of knowledge; statistics is what tells you if something is true, false, or merely anecdotal; it is the "logic of science"; it is the instrument of risk-taking; it is the applied tools of epistemology; you can't be a modern intellectual and not think probabilistically—but... let's not be suckers. The problem is much more complicated than it seems to the casual, mechanistic user who picked it up in graduate school. Statistics can fool you. In fact it is fooling your government right now. It can even bankrupt the system (let's face it: use of probabilistic methods for the estimation of risks did just blow up the banking system).

THE FOURTH QUADRANT: A MAP OF THE LIMITS OF STATISTICS [9.15.08]
By Nassim Nicholas Taleb"
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/taleb08/taleb08_index.html

Danny Whiners Dirty Oil

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080916/oil_spills_080916/20080916?hub=TopStories

wait till the greens get ahold of this. actual pollution instead of CO2

cal2 - what about the fact that Dion deliberatly merges 'pollution' with 'emissions' in his Green Shaft? He does this to induce emotions of guilt in his readers, whom he suggests are allowing polluters to destroy the earth.

His solution, of course, is to punish these polluters by taxing them. Not stopping them. But making use of their Sin by taxing it. So much for the earth.

By the way, Dion is now becoming more known for his specific personality: rigid, a 'control freak' (that's what he calls Harper); refusing to take advice (after all, what professor does?), refusing to listen to anyone else. Heh.

I often ask if there are any conservatives left in Canada. Well there is at least one. His name is Andrew Coyne.

-----------------

Shorter Coyne
By Andrew Coyne | Email | September 15th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Posted to: Andrew Coyne's Blog, Capital Read | 38 | Comment on post

Filed Under: Andrew Coyne's Blog • Capital ReadTags: Election Watch • Stephen Harper
For those who missed it, and since it is as yet impossible to post comments on any part of our site but the blogs, here is the gist of my latest column. In brief, I argue that Harper’s reputation as a “strong leader” (the central message, as I take it, of the Tory campaign) is undeserved, and that so far as it is earned, derives largely from his penchant for slapping people about: his party, his opponents, senior bureaucrats.

Usually, the term “strong leader” is reserved for someone who sets out a vision, sticks to his principles, takes risks, invests political capital, and ultimately prevails in the face of entrenched opposition, whether through the strength of his ideas, the force of his oratory, his own personal magnetism, or sheer doggedness.

None of these, I argue, apply in Harper’s case. He has not set out a vision: rather he has spent much effort persuading the public he has none. He has not stuck to his principles: he has abandoned them at every turn. He has not taken risks or invested political capital, but rather has stuck to sure-fire crowd-pleasers (GST cuts, tough-on-crime) and precisely targeted pandering (tax credits for children’s sports, the “nation” resolution).

He has generally bested his opponents by the simple but effective tactic of the jaw-dropping about-face: discarding convictions, breaking promises, saying one thing and doing another, even (in the case of fixed election dates) going so far as to make hash of his own law. This has given him the element of surprise, it is true, but only because of a serial inability on the part of his opponents to imagine he could be quite so untrustworthy.

None of this is to deny that Harper has the capacity to be a strong leader. Indeed, for pure talent he is easily the most impressive federal leader since Trudeau: intelligent, self-assured, strategic. But he has not yet put those talents to use in a way that would merit the title.

Source: http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/09/15/shorter-coyne/#comments

test

Obama may be - no, let's face it, he IS an empty suit - but she's clearly not the sharpest knife in the drawer. And she's shown the same habit as McCain for serial lying about her own record (very well documented in his own words: http://tinyurl.com/3c9qaj; http://tinyurl.com/6x2n2j) so here is Palin, no spin, just in her own words:

----
On the vice presidency: "But as for that v.p. talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it, exactly, that the v.p. does every day?" --July 31, 2008, CNBC's "Kudlow & Company"

Sorry my comment got spliced there somehow and the full comment is grappling with Kate's comment editor.

I'll try again:

RCGZ:

You point out that the media swing has re-focused the campaigns, or needs to. Absolutely. But it is not just the economy that is putting a swift end to the Palin-bump. It’s also her own words. She may be a 10 out of 10 on the beauty pageant runway, and a 10 out of 10 on the far-right values scorecard, but the more she talks, the better it looks for Obama. Already, she’s helped Obama break fundraising records with over $66 million dollars last month alone.

Obama may be - no, let’s face it, he IS an empty suit - but she’s clearly not the sharpest knife in the drawer. And she’s shown the same habit as McCain for serial lying about her own record (very well documented in his own words: google "McCain vs McCain" or "McCain debates himself" or other words to that effect) so here is Palin, no spin, just in her own words:

On the vice presidency: "But as for that v.p. talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it, exactly, that the v.p. does every day?" --July 31, 2008, CNBC's "Kudlow and Company"

On Iraq: "I've been so focused on state government, I HAVEN'T REALLY FOCUSED MUCH ON THE WAR IN IRAQ. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice, and the administration, I WANT TO KNOW THAT WE HAVE AN EXIT PLAN IN PLACE." --March 21, 2007, Alaska Business Monthly

On Iraq: "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [American soldiers] out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is GOD'S PLAN." --June 8, 2008, Wasilla Assembly of God Church

On creationism: "Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject--creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides." --October 25, 2006, gubernatorial debate

On energy: "I think GOD'S WILL has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that." --June 8, 2008, Wasilla Assembly of God Church [No less than GOD wants that pipeline built!! I must have missed that Sunday school lesson. But then again I didn't go to the Assemblies of God Pentecostal Church.]

On receiving $1.8 million in FEDERAL EARMARKS for the city of Wasilla: "FYI This does not include our nearly one million Dollars from the Feds for our Airport Paving Project. WE DID WELL!!!" --June 14, 1999, Wasilla City Council Informational Memorandum 99-62

On that "BRIDGE TO NOWHERE": Question: "Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?" Palin: "YES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALASKA'S INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS BUILT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." --October 22, 2006, Anchorage Daily News [John Kerry in reverse and in spades: I supported taking millions of dollars for the bridge before it was politically expedient for me to oppose it. But I kept the money anyway.]

On library books she doesn't like: "What would your response be if I asked you to REMOVE SOME BOOKS from the collection?" --October 1996 conversation with librarian Mary Ellen Emmons, Anchorage Daily News [The librarian said she wouldn’t ban books and was fired by Palin.]

On the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party: "Your party plays an important role in our state's politics ... KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK, and God bless you." --2008 video address to Independence Party's convention [What a patriot, eh?]

On Ivana Trump: "We want to see Ivana because we are so desperate in Alaska for any semblance of glamour and culture." --April 3, 1996, Anchorage Daily News [Loves those small towns, doesn’t she?!]

On running Wasilla: "It's not rocket science. It's six million dollars and fifty-three employees. " --October 1996, Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman [Wait a sec. Wait a sec. I thought it was the biggest insults to all Americans living in small towns everywhere to suggest that a couple of years as mayor of a very small town wasn’t enough experience to run for the most important single job in the world.]

On being governor: "I will unambiguously, steadfastly, and doggedly guard the interests of this great state, as a mother naturally guards her own. Like a Southeast Eagle and her eaglets, or, more appropriately here in the Carlson, like a Nanook defending her cub." --December 4, 2006, inaugural address

From Joint Force Quarterly, "published for the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, by the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University":

(PDF warning) Richard L. Russell, Israel's Survival Instincts and the Dangers of Nuclear Weapons in Iranian Hands

The application of the Begin Doctrine against Iran—as a replay of Israeli preventive strikes against Syrian and Iraqi nuclear capabilities—would be a profoundly more difficult operational challenge. The Iranians are no one’s fools, and they have no doubt learned from Iraq’s experience in 1981 and Syria’s experience in 2007....

RCGZ at September 16, 2008 2:40 AM

Man, you got all that right. I especially appreciate your comment about Greenspan, about whom I made some very uncomplimentary (but lonely) remarks when he was being feted here at the time of his retirement, even by our normally astute Kate, with phrases like "sir, god speed" and all that embarrassing sentimentalism.

What I find sad is my foreknowledge that this perfectly predictable financial crisis will be sourced to the free market and not government malfeasance.

I also share your view in sometmes wondering if we'd be better off with a single disastrous Obama term, and your anaology to the BC NDP is spot on. I have a view that the NDP comes back once every generation or so to destroy the economy and deliver some key short term lessons. Sadly, tho', these lessons are short term only and must be re-learned, forgotten, re-learned as the pendulum swings.

From hindustan times:

Hackers block Qaeda’s 9/11 terror on tape

Hackers prevented Al Qaeda from releasing a videotape to mark the seventh anniversary of 9/11. Al Qaeda has traditionally issued a video or audiotape by either Osama bin Laden or Ayman al Zawahiri, the terror network’s two leaders, to mark their massive terrorist attack on the US.

As-Sahab, Al Qaeda’s media unit, had indicated earlier this week that it would post such a videotape on September 11. As-Sahab had banner images on the internet showing a silhouetted head with a question mark and the words, “Wait 11 September”.

The US-based intelligence group IntelCenter had speculated the video would be a message from Osama or Zawahiri with a recording of the last will and testament of Mohammed Atta, one of the leaders of the 9/11 attackers.

Sources close to US intelligence said, “Hackers knocked out Al Qaeda’s online means of communication, thus preventing them from posting anything to commemorate the anniversary.”

Western intelligence suspects two hackers who have targeted Islamicist sites before were responsible: Aaron Weisburd from Internet Haganah and Rusty Shackleford from the web group My Pet Jawa. Continued on Page 20

I thought the following piece, coming as it does from relatively liberal CNN, was rather encouraging:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/castellanos.democrats/index.html

In the same vein, I saw an interview CNN had with Ed Koch, former Democratic mayor of New York. When Koch claimed that Sara Palin "frightened" him, the interviewer asked him why. Koch responded by citing the New York Times report concerning Palin's alleged attempt to censor books in her town library. The CNN interviewer stated that CNN had investigated the allegation and determined that it was false. Koch, loyal NY Times reader that he is, said that he still believed the story because the Times had not yet retracted it. The CNN interviewer repeated her statement that the story had been refuted. Koch reasserted his faith in the Times. This went back and forth several times. The point I'm making is that at least some elements in the MSM seem less inclined to shill for Obama.

(Via CSP; NYT warning) Georgia Offers Fresh Evidence on War’s Start

A new front has opened between Georgia and Russia, now over which side was the aggressor whose military activities early last month ignited the lopsided five-day war. At issue is new intelligence, inconclusive on its own, that nonetheless paints a more complicated picture of the critical last hours before war broke out.

Georgia has released intercepted telephone calls purporting to show that part of a Russian armored regiment crossed into the separatist enclave of South Ossetia nearly a full day before Georgia’s attack on the capital, Tskhinvali, late on Aug. 7...

tales from the vatican hood, I knew wearing red colours would get the cardinals in trouble someday.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423143,00.html

On the lighter side -- the Swiftboating of our Xena:

(Via Comment Central) Hockey moms against Sarah Palin

"Party leader François Yo Gourd plans to run in Laurier-Sainte-Marie, a riding currently held by Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe.

His campaign poster is below."
...-

"Have no fear, the Neorhino Party of Canada is finally here."
http://tinyurl.com/6c72rr (montgaz)

Never forget the Hill and Knowlton election predictor (takes polls and tracks projected seat count based on breakdowns where available, as well as trends.)

It's the best poll tracker out there.

http://predictor.hillandknowlton.ca/

Oh, click on the "make predictions" on each poll, not the one on the main window unless you want to make your own guess.

http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=15361

In which the National Education Association, the largest teachers' union in the USA explains why they will be doing whatever it takes to ensure the election of Barack Obama. It will get ugly.

It is interesting to note that of all the professions - those occupations with standardized accreditation, ongoing prof. development, and evolving best practices - the two lowest paying professions are respectively: nursing and teaching.

That they are the only unionized professions is hardly coincidence. With such well documented phenomena as 'salary compression' playing a major role, the top talents will always be dragged down by the mediocre, the clingers.

It has been the way since time began. And as long as process gets confused with product, bureaucrats, politicians, and the related chaff of the world will hang from the necks of the producers. Because unions, like the civil service, assumes homogeneity and interchangeability among input and output.

And as any reasonable person on the street can tell you, that's a load of bull...
Anyone

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Into the fire

The question on Wall Street in the wake of the latest meltdowns in the U.S. financial sector is "Who's next?" The more important issue is not which of the major banks or investment firms will follow Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy or Merrill Lynch into fire sale. Rather, the question should be "What's next?"...

Tragically, in the process of leaping out of the scalding subprime frying pan, Wall Street is heading directly into a fire that promises, if anything, to be more devastating than the present disaster. Incredibly, it bears all the hallmarks of subprime with respect to a lack of transparency, a systematic failure to disclose and an utter absence of due diligence, good governance and accountability. The next "what" is called Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF)...

See whar spending any time at the CBC does to people?

Marc Sidwell, How Sarah Got Drafted

When John McCain invited Sarah Palin to join his cause, he blindsided the press. But a campaign for her to be called to serve her country had been building its case for months.

The McCain camp was surely aware of Task Force Palin, the motley alliance of blogs and websites who spotted Palin's potential and then devoted themselves to spreading the word... If the political press didn't notice, that may be because they no longer talk to anyone but themselves...

"Stumbling campaign angers Liberal insiders"

Thanks MAZ2 for the link, the passive aggressive side of me(the big side) really enjoys listening to Liberals and their dooms day predictions under a Harper government. As I've mentioned before the imagination of the leftard causes them more grief than PMSH ever could.

Pinchas Inbari, Jordan's Outreach to Hamas: The Politics of Distress

Until recently, Jordan was the only Arab country that had boycotted the fundamentalist Hamas movement and prohibited its leadership entry into Jordan...

What caused Jordan's 180-degree shift? A large part of the answer lies in the conviction that the Annapolis peace process between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is on the verge of collapse. Currently, Jordanian government leaders are concerned with their increasingly precarious situation. Iran, its Syrian partner and Hizbullah and Hamas proxies are playing a destabilizing role in the region, while Jordan sees Israel and the United States as currently unwilling to confront them...

Who wants to bet on how many years till the 3d world war? I am betting on 12 years. Don't know why.

CBCpravda lies!!!! this canna happen in Trona, they banned guns. registered and unregistered. say it aint so.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2008/09/16/bendale-shooting.html

Are there any more conservatives - I'll disagree with you on Palin. The reason is to be found just in your own words. You take things out of context. That changes the meaning.

1) Her answer to the vp question was excellent. Why? Because it was pragmatic. Can you tell me what the PM does every day?

2)What's wrong with her answer about Iraq? Her immediate job was to her immediate constituents in Alaska. She wasn't the head of national Defense. What's wrong with having an exit strategy?

3) Her reference to 'god's plan' (and I'm an atheist) is OK with me because it essentially acknowledges that humans must remain humble rather than think that they can and should, control everything in the world.

4)I agree; I think that both creationism and evolution ought to be taught. Your error is in assuming that when you teaching something you are stating that 'it's true'. No, you are informing children of the different viewpoints - and creationism is an ancient one found in all peoples of the world. Darwinism (and I'm involved in research in that area) is NOT proven; certainly evolution is proven, but neodarwinism's two tenets of random mutation and natural selection are hotly debated in the biological world.

5) Don't be a twit. Because she acknowledges that humans must remain humble, doesn't mean that she rejects human activities and work in the world.

6)No books were banned. Ever. The librarian was rehired.

7) Bridge to nowhere; if the money was allotted to Alaska, and they CHOSE not to build the bridge, then why not use it for someothing they wanted in that state?

Don't select words and phrases out of context. And don't reject people who believe in god. I'm an atheist - but - I respect their belief. It isn't a trivial belief and you shouldn't sneer at it.

3)

are there any more conservatives - I would disagree that Andrew Coyne is the best representation of a conservative in Canada.
he's not.

he's a centralist - and the genuine conservative is a decentralist, for smaller and more local governance.

As for that comment on harper - that was junk. Harper not take risks? Heh - what do you call taxing the Income Trusts. The Liberals would have left it..with more and more systems getting on the bandwagon to evade taxes. Harper stopped it, despite the unpopularity risk.

Risks? Continuing on with Afghanistan.
Decentralization.
Trying to reform the Senate.
Focusing on the people, the middle class, rather than the professional elitists.

Trudeau - a leader? You must be joking. He was a disaster for Canada. An elitist, smug, indifferent and arrogant person whose Charter and policies on energy almost destroyed the country.

You know, I suspect that you are really a Liberal. Your comments have nothing of the genuine conservative in them.

ET, good posts today.

From infidel blogers (ibloga.blogspot.com)

The first smart thing the anti-jihad movement has done:

Between August 25 and November 4, 2008 there will be millions of copies of the award-winning DVD, Obsession, Radical Islam’s War Against the West distributed to Americans all across the United States. Also this powerful movie will also be available online, at no cost! In the near future, every American will be able to Watch Obsession!

The unpolitically correct headline reads:

Muslim Canadian Union Boss pleads guilty for threatening to kill daughter for leaving Islam.

However, we'll have to settle for Libspeak:

"Taxi union boss pleads guilty to harassing daughter"

Andrew Seymour, Ottawa Citizen
Published: Monday, September 15, 2008

OTTAWA - The boss of Ottawa's taxi union has pleaded guilty to criminal harassment after admitting he made a series of threatening phone calls and sent e-mails to his daughter after she left the family home.

Yusef Salem Al Mezel, president of Canadian Autoworkers Local 1688, pleaded guilty Monday to harassing his 23-year-old daughter, Eman Al Mezel, between July 9 and July 28 of last year, when it was alleged he repeatedly called, wrote, followed and visited her residences in an attempt to get her to return home after she turned her back on the family's Muslim religion.

Update: Barf Alert.
...-
"Garth Turner versus the CBC: Allegations of illegal recordings

Liberal MP Garth Turner is in a lot of trouble. It is a mess of his own making, trying to pass off a staged interview as news, then alleging that CPAC knew of the fabrication when the news broke.

By trying to spread the blame around, he only guaranteed that that much more would fall squarely on his shoulders.

That ought to have been the end of it. Instead, Garth Turner is trying to cast himself as the victim in this. Now we hear that he was victimized by the CBC.

Of course, it's all nonsense.

In the aftermath of Garth Turner's disaster on CPAC, the Liberal MP had an opportunity to let the story fade away.

Yes, he was burned and burned badly for having staged a "random encounter" with a constituent for the CPAC cameras to record.

That constituent was, in fact, Michael Shaye. Michael Shaye is the son of Esther Shaye, Garth Turner's campaign manager.

I revealed this information, and almost immediately, the CBC followed up. During their investigation, the CBC contacted CPAC. Why? Because the CBC had learned from Garth Turner's people (and we learned today, from Garth Turner himself) that CPAC was complicit in the broadcast shenanigans.

CPAC went ballistic. Their fury is what prompted Garth Turner's apology.

Well, we can speculate that is was their fury that prompted some senior Liberal to contact Garth Turner to command him to apologize.

But something curious came out of all this. Garth Turner originally insisted that he never spoke to the CBC, an assertion he made during his confrontation with CPAC:"
http://stevejanke.com/archives/273584.php

Where Danish Police fail against Muslim gangs, the Hells Angels step in:

(Politiken.DK)

"Hell’s Angels applications increase tenfold in connection with immigrant showdown."

Interest for membership of the Hell's Angels suppoort group AK81 has exploded.

The Hell’s Angels biker group is experiencing a flood of new applications for membership, in particular for its support group AK81. The group normally receives only few enquiries in its web-based guest book, but the past week alone has seen 250 queries.

Seventy-five of those enquiring have asked to become members of the AK81 group, or to be invited to Hell’s Angels parties in order to gain affiliation.

AK81 is a support group for the Hell’s Angels. The acronym stands for the Danish words Altid Klar (Always Ready), while 81 are the alphabet numbers for H and A.

Showdown
The increase in membership enquiries comes in connection with a showdown in recent weeks between immigrant groups and the Hell’s Angels as well as shows of strength by Hell’s Angels members who have walked the streets of Copenhagen and Århus en masse.

So it begins.

Posted by: ET at September 16, 2008 4:09 PM

The ever present faux-cons supporting a liberal-lite 'Conservative' party.

Partisans don't seem able to seperate fact from fiction, except to reinforce their own worldview. Facts be damned.

Caledonia? Not much leadership from our cons, except entrenching race-based law, and ensuring the lawyers get billable hours and the Indian Industry grows.

Accountability Act? 30 of 55 promises actually made it into the legislation, half of those compromised. Any gob'mint unable to pass a reform minded document, in light of ad-scam, and screw it up? C'mon, it speaks for itself.

Absolute property ownership? How's that coming along? Heard any of the faux-cons bring that up lately?

18% increase in gov't spending in 3 years at the helm. This outfit is metasticizing as fast as it can. Party boys backdooring party boys.

$5 billion in un-budgetted, unannounced spending since May recess. Cons seemed not to like it when they were in opposition. Promised to govern differently. How's that coming along?

The Cons are no different from the Libranos. Giv'em enough time, they'll find their own adscam.

There is enough to go on for an hour. Above all, Coyne is an ACTUAL conservative. Unlike the faux-cons with the pink centre, or the so-cons and their desire for control of everyone's morality dial.

Think for yourself. Free your mind.

Right, ET. Coyne is not a conservative. He believes in fiscal restraint instead of record-breaking spending, limited not expanding government, income tax cuts that improve competitiveness not (or at least well before) gimicky tax cuts-for votes, simplified taxes not smorgasborg of special interest tax cuts here there and everywhere, reduction of taxes instead of increases in pork, reduction of taxes instead of increases in federal transfers to provinces (when the provinces could be raising their own taxes if they needed it), governing by conservative principles not by polls and how to win over the next vote.

Those all seem pretty core conservative principles to me. Not one of them shared by Harper. Not sure I've ever heard "centralist" as being a core conservative value. Might want to check that with Dick Cheney and Bush and McCain who have centralized power in Washington like it's never been centralized before - security, economics, trade and securities regulation/persecution, education (No Child Left Behind) - all of these have made America stronger and better, and all are totally consistent with conservativism.

There are some conservatives left in Canada - Coyne, Coren, Nicholls - willing to pass on the kool-aid, but not many.

Hardboiled and ATAMC I was going to list some of the many, many things Harper has accomplished in his minority term but what would be the point as you are not interested in his successes just your perceived failures. You both, IMHO, are liberal trolls and it is not worth the effort to refute your posts.

hardboiled-the-nonrealist. You know, you ought to face facts and be realistic.

1) Caledonia was and is, a provincial responsibility. Not a federal one. Natives on non-native land, behaving in a criminal manner, are provincial responsibilities. That's realism.

2) The accountability act was changed by the Senate. Oh, you've forgotten to include the reality of the Senate? Ah well. So, you think that a minority govt can override the majority opposition and the Liberal Senate? That's why you are not a realist; you don't face facts.

3)What's your point about 'absolute property ownership'?

4) What's your point about govt spending? What party boys? Are you actually suggesting they are spending it on parties?

5) Same with your 'unbudgeted spending'. Kindly explain. Facts matter, not just your statements. Are you saying that Harper is spending outside of the budget? Prove it. Facts.

6) No, I disagree; Coyne is not a conservative.
Oh - and I do think for myself. You live in your own fictional world and refuse to acknowledge that. Ah well..that's you.

are there any more conservatives?
I don't accept your binary outline of Coyne. He's not a conservative. He's a 'right-Liberal'. He's a centralist.

Conservatives believe in fiscal restraint, income tax cuts and less central govt.
I'm sure you are aware that Harper has reduced corporate income tax rate from 22 to 15% by 2012; reduced small business income tax from 12 to 11; increased the capital gains exemption for small business/farmers..to 750,000 from 500,000..the first increase in 20 years...reducing filing and remittances for small business, ..reduced income taxes, reduced gst, simplified taxes via corporate rate harmoniziation..paying off federal debt to save interest...on and on and on. But you know all that, don't you?

Harper doesn't govern by polls but by principles. Decentralization is basic, returning power to the provinces. International responsibilities are principled decisions. That includes rejecting the francophone 'league of nations' definition of Israel as the aggressor; that includes standing up to China on human rights...

No, centralism is not a core conservative value; that's leftism - and you are not a Conservative; you are a leftist Liberal. Decentralization is a core conservative value.

What the Washington establishment has done has nothing to do with Conservativism - and I have no idea why you are bringing it up. Bush's legacy will be his destruction of Islamic fascism and its capacity to destroy democracy. That's quite a legacy.

Conservative values are focused on the middle class, the class of the individual, the small to medium business, the entrepreneur who makes good, the non-govt worker. That's Harper's area. And also McCain's area - remember what McCain said - he's going to Washington to serve the public, not for himself.

The left, of which you are obviously a member, are focused on class politics; there's the elitist upper class Who Rule, over the peasants. Two classes. Conservatives only have ONE class, the middle class. The left are also into Big Government - which you also support.

Again, you are not a conservative. I haven't heard a word from you about: decentralization, the power of the people rather than those appointed (senate, judges, civil service); the middle class, individualism, smaller govt with more responsibilities to the provinces; reduction in taxes.

There is a reason Reform came into existence. And those reasons haven't changed. The cool pink centre of the faux-cons remain. It'd be far better if the progs just went to the Libranos, their natural home.

ET, below should keep you rationalizing for awhile. As to the other items you ask about? Look it up.

OTTAWA: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) today updated its tally of pre-election spending announcements made by the Conservative government to $19.2-billion. The timetable is June 2nd to September 6th, the day before the start of the federal election campaign. This is roughly $198-million a day and more than $8.2-million every hour. The 2008 budget set spending growth at 3.4 per cent this fiscal year. The department of finance reported last month that expenditures grew by 11.1 per cent in June alone and swelled an eye-popping 8.4 per cent in the first three months of the year. This is two-and-a-half times the 2008 budget plan.

http://www.taxpayer.com/pdf/Conservative_Spending.pdf

Some people just don't get it.
Is Lizzy one of those?
You decide, see Stephen Taylor's latest info.
http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2008/09/tvo-disagrees-with-elizabeth-may/

"“62″ Harper Gov’t Accomplishments

A
(1) Accountability Act — passed April 11, 2006 (Link)

(2) Afghanistan mission extended to 2011 (Link)

(3) Age of consent from 14 to 16 effective May 1, 2008 (Link)

(4) Agent Orange compensation package of $96 million –$20,000 to all veterans and civilians who lived within 5 kilometers of CFB Gagetown in N.B. between 1966 and 1967 with illnesses associated with exposure (Link)

(5) Apology to Native people by Government of Canada on June 11, 2008 for residential school abuses (Link)

(6) Automative Innovation Fund of $250 million over five years (or $50 million a year) to developing greener, more fuel efficient vehicles (scroll part way down this page for source)

B,C
(7) Border guards armed (Link)

(8) B’nai Brith International President’s Gold Medallion awarded to PM Stephen Harper (Link)

(9) Canada Employment Credit of $1000.00 (Link)"
[...]
V-Z
(62) Visa requirements lifted for up to six month visits — to Poland, Slovakia, Lithuania and Hungary (Link)"
http://harpergovernmentaccomplishments.com/

Too, too cute to behold, Boob Rae coming to the aid of Dion for the first time on the campaign trail. If Rae has the nerve to criticize how Harper is handling the economy after he bankrupted Ontario as NDP Premier of Ontario, there's no accounting for his gall. Shameless. Lucky he's running for a seat in Toronto, the brain free voting capital of Ontario, or he wouldn't even get a seat in the HOC.

Guess it's time for an 'Anything But Rae' campaign if Dion needs a minder.

Hardboiled: don't fret. It is biologically and psychologically impossible to crack through the mindset of a hyper-partisan.

And really we should be thanking ET. He has made our lives easier. No longer do we the sheeple have to fret about who is or is not a conservative, what is or is not a conservative principle. ET reigns over us and has simplified conservativism for us all. If you support Harper uncritically, then and only then will The Great and Mighty ET deign you worthy of being a conservative. If criticize Harper, if you think fiscal prudence is important, if you don't drink the kool-aid, if you think for yourself then, obviously, are a liberal. There can be no disputing it. ET has said it is so.

/sarc

Harper can and has accomplished much. He is clearly the better choice of a bunch of bad choices. I will vote for him. He will win and, in this contest in this context, I will be glad.

But I will never call unchecked record-breaking spending "conservative". I will never call unchecked record-breaking spending on opinion polls either "conservative" or governing by principle. I will never call pork barrel politics "conservative". I will never call corporate welfare "conservative", especially after vowing not to do it. I will never call regional pork barrel development programs "conservative". I will never call giving some provinces more seats in Parliament because they voted in more Conservatives either "conservative" or democratic (and Harper and Flaherty and Pollievre and Van Loan can take their hatred for voters in the "small province of the federation" and shove deep up their asses). I will never call support for the HRCs and section 13 "conservative". I will never call appointing unaccountable senators and making them prominent cabinet ministers "conservative". I will never call a restriction on my freedom to do with my money what I want, including help my local candidate as much as I want against vested liberal interests and their MSM cheerleaders, "conservative". I will never call embracing and encouraging floor crossers "conservative". I will never call covering up report after report "conservative". I will never call the in-and-out scam "conservative".

Obviously you so ET.

I don't have to prove my conservative bona fides to the likes of you, ET, who live off the public dime. I earn my own living.

It is blind followers like you, ET, that allow former conservatives to get and hold power for its own sake. Shame.

Hardboiled:

You've spent months on here trying to foment "rebellion".

How's that working for you? Appears to me, you are an army of one.

And if it's really only a case of you being slow on the uptake, let me help you out:

Harper is, has been, and probably always will be, up to his a** in alligators.

He's trying to win a war. People here understand that.

With a little "seasoning " you might also.

Besides, from the horse's mouth: "Change will be incremental".

Anyone who tells you different is a liar, a fool, or a Liberal.

Hardboiled: don't fret. It is biologically and psychologically impossible to crack through the mindset of a hyper-partisan.

And really we should be thanking ET. He has made our lives easier. No longer do we the sheeple have to fret about who is or is not a conservative, what is or is not a conservative principle. ET reigns over us and has simplified conservativism for us all. If you support Harper uncritically, then and only then will The Great and Mighty ET deign you worthy of being a conservative. If criticize Harper, if you think fiscal prudence is important, if you don't drink the kool-aid, if you think for yourself then, obviously, are a liberal. There can be no disputing it. ET has said it is so.

/sarc

Harper can and has accomplished much. He is clearly the better choice of a bunch of bad choices. I will vote for him. He will win and, in this contest in this context, I will be glad.

But I will never call unchecked record-breaking spending "conservative". I will never call unchecked record-breaking spending on opinion polls either "conservative" or governing by principle. I will never call pork barrel politics "conservative". I will never call corporate welfare "conservative", especially after vowing not to do it. I will never call regional pork barrel development programs "conservative". I will never call giving some provinces more seats in Parliament because they voted in more Conservatives either "conservative" or democratic (and Harper and Flaherty and Pollievre and Van Loan can take their hatred for voters in the "small province of the federation" and shove deep up their asses). I will never call support for the HRCs and section 13 "conservative". I will never call appointing unaccountable senators and making them prominent cabinet ministers "conservative". I will never call a restriction on my freedom to do with my money what I want, including help my local candidate as much as I want against vested liberal interests and their MSM cheerleaders, "conservative". I will never call embracing and encouraging floor crossers "conservative". I will never call covering up report after report "conservative". I will never call the in-and-out scam "conservative".

Obviously you so ET.

I don't have to prove my conservative bona fides to the likes of you, ET, who live off the public dime. I earn my own living.

It is blind followers like you, ET, that allow former conservatives to get and hold power for its own sake. Shame.

ATACL - heh. You have a lot of 'never's, don't you. Right there, that makes you not a conservative, because a conservative isn't trapped within a 'necessary' ideology, but focuses on the pragmatic realities of the situation.

Your use of 'unchecked' (spending etc) is hyperbole.
I don't know what 'pork barrel politics' means in this situation. Examples?

Sorry, but Harper has no authority to give to, or take seats from, the provinces. That's under the rule of Elections Canada and constitutional formulae. Incredible that you could seriously state that a PM could increase/decrease provincial seats in the House. Whew.

No, Harper doesn't support the HRCs. Have you read his comments on them? But he can't do anything about them without a majority. Of course, you don't understand that.

Tough - we have a Westminster parliamentary system which is based around appointments rather than elections. Until that changes - and a majority is required for such deep structural changes - your view is irrelevant. The fact is, even though Harper would like the Senate elected, it is appointed.
Whether you think that such people should be useless idiots as so many are, or, those who are useful..made use of..that's another issue. Nothing to do with 'Being Conservative'.

I have no idea what restrictions are placed on you about helping your local candidate. Nothing to do with 'Being Conservative'. If you are talking about money, then, I'm all in favour of restricting the amounts people can donate to politicians. The Liberal Regime was based on enormous 'donations' from corporations, unions, and individuals...and was the cause of much of the corruption of our system.

I agree - floor crossers aren't 'conservative'. But, we have no rules against them. Surely you aren't talking about Garth Turner and Belinda?

Covering up reports? No idea what you are talking about.

Again - what you are ignoring are the basic principles of Conservatvism; that focus on the middle class, individualism, lower taxes, decentralization of powers.

I'd suggest you not get into name-calling and ad hominem...That's such a 'Liberal' characteristic. Ah well, and here you are, calling yourself a Conservative..and yet..moving immediately into the name-calling, the insults, the personal. There goes integrity..

I don't live off any public dime and never have; I work for a living and have earned every cent I've made. But again, integrity is a Conservative trait, while name-calling is a Liberal trait. Cheers..

Are there any more conservatives: ET makes some very good points in rebuttal to your hatchet job of Sarah Palin.

It's patently unfair to take talks/speeches she has given to Christians in their churches as representative of what--or how--she would share with a secular, political audience.

When I have spoken to church groups, the vocabulary I use is particular to that group. In other words, I talk about a personal relationship with God and what His plans for me/us might be, in language that the group to whom I'm speaking understands and relates to.

On the other hand, in another setting, I would avoid the mention of God or His plans (even if I was clear that God and His plans were part of the equation: That's between God and me).

Look, freedom of expression and freedom of religion are assured in both the United States and Canada, and Sarah Palin should not be criticized for exercising both of these rights.

The YouTube clips from which you've highlighted some of her remarks are from before she became the VP candidate. She might say the same thing now or, again, she might not, knowing that they would be closely scrutinized.

If you take Sarah Palin's comments in context and don't filter them through lib-left default spectacles, they are not as shocking as you seem to think. It is a sad comment on our society today--which insists that it's "open," "tolerant," and "diverse"--when a VP candidate, or any candidate to political office for that matter, is dissed for openly expressing their faith IN A CHURCH TO AN AUDIENCE OF CHRISTIANS.

Are you being open and tolerant, are there any more conservatives?

maz2

Garth TUrner was first coservative then independent then green party ... then liberal

taht is interesting

may be Garth Turner can be good PM candidate
because he has experince being with every body
and see EMPTHINESS in all

with is lack of correct leadership

ask him for pM or VP for PM is good choice he has experince though

and I talked to him once he is kind man and feel responsible too for some conscern I had

I know and noticed conservative hate him becase of DION

the lack of his emptiness for him keep moving ane changing is to
listen to may idea he would be fine

other than that I have not idea too much about him as I heard from you I donot know him well

Oh oh! More trouble on the Lib campaign! Air Farce One (da plane,da plane!) has been diverted to Mtl on way to London due to mechanical problems.Fife just said on MDL,that "it ran out of carbon credits!"

Two hilarious ads here http://www.carlustblog.com/2008/09/ford-ka.html

That's right Sammy,da plane she got trouble!

Apparently they'll have to have a sleep-over in Montreal. Hope they brought a toothbrush and a change of drawers!

Wonder if the Media traveling with them have upped their life insurance?

Ref your post about about professions Hardboiled.

Those of us over here on the right like to go on at length about the elitist left and rightly so. Your post on professions is so utterly elitist that I am surprised you are not on the Dion plane and stuck in Montreal at the moment.

I can think of plenty of "professions" by your definition that have unionized employees. Have you EVER done a days work with your hands? And typing does not count.

ET, do you have even the first clue what it means to be a conservative? You seem to be picking and choosing and otherwise making things up as you go. You also seem to be either not following politics very closely or have decided that because we're in an election that no attacks on Harper are allowed.

"Your use of 'unchecked' (spending etc) is hyperbole." 18% spending increases under Harper. Record breaking spending. $198 million in a few weeks leading up to the election. Flip flopping on specific spending promises (now I won't pay corporate welfare to Ford! What? there's an election coming? How much do you want Ford?). If there are two defining core conservative principles when it comes to finances it is cut spending and cut taxes. He's got a c+/B from me for tax cuts but his outspending of Liberals gets an F-!

"I don't know what 'pork barrel politics' means in this situation. Examples?" The subway no one but realtors and socialists want to nowhere - er, not nowhere, but right through Flaherty's riding, hmmm. Bev Oda, before launching the Conservative's own sponsorship program, canvasses Conservative MPs for their pet projects. Two name two easy and obvious ones off the top of my head.

"Sorry, but Harper has no authority to give to, or take seats from, the provinces. That's under the rule of Elections Canada and constitutional formulae. Incredible that you could seriously state that a PM could increase/decrease provincial seats in the House. Whew." You don't read the news much I'm guessing. Or the Constitution. Harper rebalanced the seating in the House by giving Alberta and BC rep-by-pop but called Ontario the small man of the federation for saying we want a little of that democracy too. McSquinty may be a liar and a taxer, but he was right on this one.

"No, Harper doesn't support the HRCs. Have you read his comments on them?" Yes - he said he didn't see any need to do anything. Weaselly politician and not standing up to principles.

"The fact is, even though Harper would like the Senate elected, it is appointed. " You really don't get the whole "promise" and "principle" thing do you. He promised not to appoint anyone to the senate who was not elected. That's a conservative principle. On his first day in office he appointed someone who not only didn't run but refused to run when ridings opened up. Not only unprecedented but he remains unaccountable because he doesn't have to answer to the House. Politically expedient to flip flop on a crucial Reform platform issue and appoint your buddy to a lifelong job with tons of perks, but not very conservative in anyone's book.

"I agree - floor crossers aren't 'conservative'. But, we have no rules against them. Surely you aren't talking about Garth Turner and Belinda?" What the hell do they have to do with this discussion? True conservatives decried their anti-democratic floor crossing and then went silent when Emerson and Wajid came over. Harper was just sly enough not to say anything beforehand. We should have taken that as a hint that he was more politician than principled conservative ideologue.

"I'd suggest you not get into name-calling and ad hominem..." So not only do you appoint yourself as the one who gets to decide who is a conservative and who not, you get to decide that while you can insult anyone as you see fit, no one else is allowed to criticize you. That's censorship, sir, and it is definitely not a conservative value. It seems you are the liberal here.

"I don't live off any public dime and never have; I work for a living and have earned every cent I've made." In that case I do sincerely apologize. I had thought you were a professor at a university but I must be mistaken so I do apologize because that would indeed have been an insult.

And I don't get where you invent this idea that decentralization is a conservative principle. It is not and never has been. I gave you the Bush example of some perfectly good conservative actions that had a centralizing effect. Decentralization is, if anything, a generally useful tool for fiscal restraint - minimize all governments and let's start by taking things away from the federal government - but it is a means to an end - smaller government, less spending - and not a simplistic end on its own. No better proof of that than that socialists like the Liberals and PQ in Quebec want decentralization.

ET, go read a bit. Start with canon. You know the original, uncut junk. These are the books like The Conservative Mind, The Road to Serfdom, The Unheavenly City and Crisis of a House Divided. Then move on to some more recent stuff a little bit less academic: The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America, by George Nash (updated version); The Portable Conservative Reader, edited by Russell Kirk an excellent collection.A Conflict of Visions; and of course Strauss/Cropsey's History of Political Philosophy.

Then come back and try to argue Harper is a conservative.

From The Sunday Times
September 14, 2008

Revealed: UK’s first official sharia courts

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749183.ece

Alas, scratching England from my hoped-to-visit-before-I'm-dead list. Moving Alaska into its place.

Batb:

I did not mean to offend any believer. If by simply quoting Palin's own words, I've somehow offended or left the impression that I think faith is something that should be kept out of politics then I take it back fully.

I just think, as many other solid conservative writers have thought and said, that we made a shrewd political move with Palin but not a wise move. I think she is impressive at first, but dig just a bit and there are major problems ahead and we won't have the liberals or the MSM to blame.

Specifically, two examples out of those quotations which can be derided as being out of context. First, she stood up in front of $40M and claimed to be a fiscal conservative because she said no to Washington's "bridge to nowhere". She didn't. She said yes. There were actually two bridges and she flip flopped on one, but not without taking the federal money. She's said she doesn't take earmarks and she's taken hundreds of millions.

Second, and this does touch on faith, I actually find it a little offensive when someone says stuff like God wants this pipeline built. God doesn't give a crap about your pet project, even if it is good for the US economy. That kind of reduction of God to a political player reduces Him and undermines Him frankly.

I fear she has all of the talking points down and down well, but that she's really a bit of a lightweight with hardly any relevant experience or knowledge of the job. McCain did not do us any favours.

any conservatives here..(are you really hardboiled under another name? You two sound very similar).

1) Subway to nowhere? Where's that?

2) Again, Harper cannot give Alberta and BC more or less seats. No politician can do that. It's strictly under the control of Elections Canada.
There is a formula for alloting seats. I suggest you check out the formula at Elections Canada. It's done by the census (every ten years).

3) Whew- you read Harper's comments against the HRC - and conclude that he didn't see any need for change? I don't think you read them; he was strongly opposed. BUT - he cannot do anything with a minority.

4)Tough - he needed someone from Quebec who had industrial policy skills. Fortier was that person. He's now running for a seat.

5)No, I defined your views as Liberal. If you consider that name-calling - I can't do anything about that! You are the one engaged in ad hominem.

Yes - I am a professor. You denigrate professors - ie, you actually state that calling someone a professor is 'an insult'. Wow. And define us as 'living off the public dime'. That's ad hominem.
I earned my salary.

Do you define a heart surgeon as 'living off the public dime'? He's paid by the govt.
Do you define a pediatrician as 'living off the public dime'? He's paid by the govt.
What about the biologist in the lab? What about the fireman on the job - also 'living off the public dime'? The policeman?
None of them do any work? They all 'live off the public dime'? That's quite the sanctimonious sneer on your part.

I disagree. Decentralization is a conservative principle. Because Bush made centralist decisions does not mean that centralism is conservative.

No, socialists like the Liberals and PQ in Quebec do NOT want decentralization. They aren't interested in Canada. They want nationalism in Quebec, but in the actual 'nation' of Quebec - they are very top-down and centralist in governance. The Quebec government is top-down authoritarian and heavily bureaucratic in Quebec.

I've probably read more than you - including Hayek's work. I'd suggest you read Karl Popper: The Open Society and Its Enemies. Now, that describes the difference between good and bad governance.
I disagree with you about the nature of Conservativism and also disagree with you about Harper. Not much point in further discussion.

Again - what you are ignoring are the basic principles of Conservatvism; that focus on the middle class.... Posted by: ET at September 16, 2008 8:19 PM

I understand conservatism to treat all citizens equally, with equal representation before the law, and equality of opportunity a necessity. I don't like the idea preferring anyone over another by the government.

"You've spent months on here trying to foment "rebellion".

I just ensure the bullsh*t meter here isn't turned off. The Cons have disappointed enough to get called on it. And people who believe in the party and general ideology, they have a responsibility to say their piece. Otherwise, you belong to a party trying to attain and retain power, devoid of principle. And ignoring their orgy of spending won't make it go away.

And yeah, ACH/ATACH is probably a paid troll from the Libranos.

"Subway to nowhere? Where's that?" When I said Flaherty's riding, what did you think I meant? Please keep up. You don't even have to pay for a newspaper anymore to get the news you know.

"Again, Harper cannot give Alberta and BC more or less seats. No politician can do that. It's strictly under the control of Elections Canada.
There is a formula for alloting seats. I suggest you check out the formula at Elections Canada. It's done by the census (every ten years)." Again, keep up ET. Bill C-22 was introduced in November of 2007 by the Conservatives to reallocate seats in the Parliament. No Constitutional amendment necessary, dear professor.

"you read Harper's comments against the HRC - and conclude that he didn't see any need for change? I don't think you read them; he was strongly opposed". Please provide some proof ET. Please please keep up with current events if you are going to talk about them. As for no desire to change, ask any of the many many very disappointed bloggers and fellow commenters here. Or ask the PMO which issued this letter to inquirors: "the federal government respects the Commission’s independence and does not interfere in its normal course of operations". Sounds like they are OK with not doing anything to me. And how did they vote on Keith Martin's bill afterall? Liberals supporting the killing of section 13 you would have thought would have presented a prime opportunity if he really opposed it. Just link to the quotation where he says he opposes the HRCs, ET. I'm waiting.

"Tough - he needed someone from Quebec who had industrial policy skills. Fortier was that person. He's now running for a seat." And with that you've proven my single point: What you describe is the very definition of political expediency governing over principle.

"Do you define a heart surgeon as 'living off the public dime'? He's paid by the govt.
Do you define a pediatrician as 'living off the public dime'? He's paid by the govt.
What about the biologist in the lab? What about the fireman on the job - also 'living off the public dime'? The policeman?
None of them do any work? They all 'live off the public dime'? That's quite the sanctimonious sneer on your part." Actually it's quite a demonstration of stupidity on your part. What happens if any of them don't perform at a top level? They get canned. They are accountable. What if you don't? Nothing. No accountability. Cash for life. You say you "earn" your money. Prove it.

"Decentralization is a conservative principle. Because Bush made centralist decisions does not mean that centralism is conservative." Can you read? I didn't say centralism is conservative. I said it is a means to an end. If more centralism is required to serve a conservative principle, like security, than it is good. And generally it is more useful for a fiscal conservative to decentralize as means to eliminate government. But it is a tool to an end. Not the end on its own.

"No, socialists like the Liberals and PQ in Quebec do NOT want decentralization. They aren't interested in Canada." Tell that to Premier Charest. I suspect he'd be insulted by what you say. And that's just the Quebec example. Pretty much every NL Premier has been a decentralist, as have many other liberal premiers. Toronto's goofball socialist mayor wants powers very decentralized.

"I've probably read more than you". How pompous and just like an ivory tower academic. Well, let me take you up on that arrogance. I'm always looking to educate myself. Being so well read, can you please provide me with a single source by any prominent conservative writer in Canada, the US or the UK (or anywhere) who says that decentralization is a conservative principle.

Bottom single big point, someone who breaks records spending like Harper for pork barrel projects, regional development agencies, corporate welfare, polling, etc... cannot legitimately lay claim to being a "conservative". More conservative than the others... maybe... but by a hair.

No, actually, there's nobody here now, everyone left dozens of
comments ago when the discussion here became a pissing match.

Are there any Conservatives Here:

(What a pompous moniker)

When Stephen Harper led the National Citizens Coalition he wrote recognized papers and speeches against the Human Rights Act, as it stood and it still stands. Look them up.

Of course he will dismantle the unelected leftist thought enablers, otherwise called the HRC's. It's only natural that he do so.

The problem with you is that you are not part of the populist Conservative Party.

Rather, you seem part of a fringe breakaway party that numbers in the hundreds, more likely just one. You.

Or else you're a Liberal..

Latest results from electoral-vote.com:

In Wisconsin, where Obama regularly had 10-13 point leads, his lead is now down to 4 pts.

In Washington (state, not DC), where Obama had 10-16 pt leads, it's now down to 2.

Virginia is too close to call; the lead has swung back and forth in recent polls, with the difference never exceeding 4 pts, so they're all within the polling margin of error.

Pennsylvania, the state Joe Biden was supposed to deliver, regularly gave Obama 5-8 pt leads. Since the two VP picks were announced, that lead has dwindled, and McCain and Obama were tied in the latest poll.

Ohio see-sawed back and forth between the two, but since Palin was announced, McCain has won the last four polls, albeit by small margins.

New Mexico was Democrat by small margins, but since Palin was announced, it's now Republican, again by a small margin.

Nevada has swung from a 5 pt Dem lead in August to a 3 pt Rep lead post-Palin.

Minnesota, where Obama had leads of 18 pts in July, is now tied.

Michigan, where Obama had leads of 5-9 pts, is now tied.

Indiana, where McCain had held leads of 8-10 pts, is now Obama by 2 pts, but hasn't been polled since August.

Florida, which had been close to tied for months, is now favouring McCain by 5-8 pts.

Colorado is too close to call; neither has been able to pull out much of lead since the conventions. They have split the last four polls, all by 2 pts or less.

Interesting to see what happens over the next two weeks as the fallout from Wall Street ripples through the economy.

ACH:

Do try to keep up. Here is clause 4 of Bill C-22:

a) The “electoral divisor” for the first readjustment to the number of seats in the House after the coming into force of the bill is calculated by dividing the total population of the provinces, using the most recent decennial census, by the number of members in the House of Commons assigned to all provinces in the first readjustment that followed the coming into force of the Constitution Act, 1985 (Representation).

b) The “electoral divisor” for subsequent seat readjustments will be derived by dividing the total population of the provinces, using the most recent decennial census, by the number of members of the House of Commons thirty years prior to this most recent decennial census.

You do note that both sections state that the most recent decennial be used? And the bill has not yet passed. In fact, it hasn't even gone to committee yet. For someone who thinks he's quite a know-it-all, you don't seem to know very much.

In particular, you don't seem to recognize that in a minority government, with an obstructionist and unelected Senate, Harper just can't do what he wants. If he wanted to do something like end all the HRC's, or even amend the rules that govern them, any person with a functional IQ would know that the Canadian left would immediately gang up on him, calling him "Hitler" like Mike Valpey and some aggrieved artists, and probably force an election over the issue. As Bismarck said "Politics is the art of the possible". Harper's goal in the first term was to calm Canadians down, erase his "scary" image, and show that he didn't have a "hidden agenda". Picking needless fights with the Opposition, even if they would have turtled, would have ruined his chances in this election. That you can't see that tells me you don't understand much about minority government.