Re: The balloting at Guelf U.

Alethia

1:19 AM on April 16, 2011

This comment has been removed from our system.

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show DetailsHide Details

With only one official democracy is severely damaged. That is how you get votes like that in Iran or Afghanistan. If there are no bona fide witnesses of its validity, who is to say the box wasn't stuffed?
Its the witness of the scrutineers that has always validated the veracity of democracy.

Alethia

Iggy said: "Mr. Harper checks the facebook page..." comon... as if Mr. Harper had time to do that??
Its his kind of lies and exaggeration that make the left so dangerous.

Rest assured if this were Obama's riding and security did the same thing, you would never hear a whisper of it.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/elections-canada-validates-contested-student-ballot-in-guelph/article1986799/comments/

Mr. Harper and the Leadership Debate (english)

Few people of any political stripe would disagree Mr. Harper has a political genius.  We may not like him, or what he has done, but you have to admit he used pretty much every lever of power available to him adroitly.  It seemed like he  thwarted every scheme by employing those powers in unexpected ways--keeping the opposition off-balanced.  Not perfect a government, but it is impressive how Mr H. has survived over 5 years of minority government from a political science point of view.  Last night it struck me:  What is the one thing Canadians hate about Parliament?  The "bickering", the heckling, behavior that would be inappropriate in any class room or social environ.

The genius of Mr. Harper, is that he let the other three drag that sort of "debate" from the House of Commons into their midst last night.  Then, held his cool, calmly answered with stats and numbers, and let  the other 3 make fools of themselves.  While he stood in quiet contrast.

I wish I had the optimism to think the most voters vote for something rather than against it.

I don't think voter pep talks, however altruistic they might be, will do the trick. Given that tendency voters have to vote against something, I don't blame a candidate to be defensive. Clearly the Conservative strategy is to run the campaign with minimal mistakes. Hence the 4 question rule.
The problem is that gamely being open to questions is the same as foolishly exposing yourself to attack. Lets face it, the media hardly can claim innocence and objectivity in their motives and stories. This media has long been hostile to Mr. Harper. So he had to choose a side between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Pulling a fast one.

The Liberals have nothing to lose.  They are desperate.  Stuck at 20% in the polls.  They will debate anyone at any time because it can't get any worse.

Watch what happens with the public back-lash on this one.

There was an attempt to move the Auditor's report on the fast track for release.
This is usually not done. However, for partisan reasons, the Liberals and Bloc tried to pull a fast one.

Here are some pertinent details:

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Failed+motion+release+report+during+election+respectful/4601992/story.html

Canada's watergate

Not out of respect of parliament. This is what the opposition has been accusing the Conservatives for. First and foremost it is an affront to parliament. It is knowingly deceptive since it is reasonable to believe all involved knew the tentative nature of a draft. So now the Liberals are back to lying to Canada.

This is Canada's Watergate:  Theft for partisan gain.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Failed+motion+release+report+during+election+respectful/4601992/story.html

Respect for an NDP MP

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Failed+motion+release+report+during+election+respectful/4601992/story.html

 Finally, a breath of fresh air.

Security for Mr. Harper

I am profoundly befuddled by Canadians who see this as some Conservative plot/short-fall.
The security for president Obama makes this look like child's play. No one ever complains.
It's not the unpopular president who has been assassinated. Because that lunacy is hard to anticipate, sometimes the RCMP are just being careful.

@elbro I never read a comment in all caps, but immediately push the thumbs down button.
In case you didn't know, all-caps is the equivalent of yelling and screaming. Not the sort of behavior one expects in civilized debate.

Corporate taxes

Canadians have a choice: Do we want more wealth taxed at a lower rate, or less wealth taxed at a higher rate?

More wealth at a lower rate nets more than a higher tax will.

At 15% Canada is only starting to be competitive with its corporate tax regime. Ireland is at 12.5%. If you were a big wealthy company and could move your wealth to any country in the world, where would you move it?

The US is at 30% their recovery is stalled, business is leaving in droves and have racked up a deficit of 4 trillion dollars since Obama began his presidency. That is equivalent to a deficit of 400 billion dollars in Canada given our relative size to the US. 400 BILLION. If that were the case our total national debt right now would be almost double--at 1 Trillion dollars.

Carefully managing corporate taxation levels was a prudent plan put in place by the Liberals. We have been acting on their targets. Clearly the Liberals have abandoned their plan, but the Conservatives think it is a good plan for good reason. Canada is growing again. More people are employed now than before the recession. We have a reason to be bullish, being competitive with these rates will create more jobs and wealth than we could otherwise.

Finally, while it is true lower rates pull in big business into Canada, most corporations are mom and pop shops on our street corners. They get to pay taxes twice. Once as a corporation, and then again in income taxes. This move helps small business in Canada even more than big business.

More F-35 tedium...

Well since we want honesty on this. We agreed to pay 6.8B for 65 planes. That is what we agreed to. The government also indicated they could see that number rising to 8.9B. Then it was asked to provide maintenance costs for the life of the plane (funny I don't add 20,000.00 maintenance to the sticker price of my car). So the number came in around 15B-16B. At that point the numbers are taking off, and since it appears any ol john can name a number it doubles every week. 30B this week, 60B next week. However, when all the dust is settled Canada agreed to purchase 65 jets for 6.8B, not 20, not 30 not 60. Somewhere between 6.8B and 60B, there is a walk away number. IF the numbers do look like 30B, Canada won't be walking away alone. Brittan and Norway and... will be leading the charge.

We aren't stupid. We pay no money until delivery in 2018, and we are under no obligation to stick with the deal if they monkey with the numbers.

Delete

The F-18 has been a very good plane. 10 years ago, our highly skilled pilots could hold their own against other air-forces while war gaming (testing).
No more, a recent war-game had every one of our planes shot down before we could even see them. From now on our interceptors are vulnerable to any stealth based plane. So we can send them up there to "patrol" the arctic. But defend? Pitiful.

_____________________________

Joey Bloggins said:
The F-22, F-35, F-18E/F, Typhoon, Gripen and Rafale were ALL looked at. The F-22 was eliminated right away, because it would not be for sale to anyone other than the U.S. After analysis, the Gripen and Rafale were eliminated as not having any performance advantage over our current CF-18. A more extensive evaluation of the F-35, F-18E/F and Typhoon was conducted. The conclusion was that the F-35 is the only aircraft that meets the mandatory high level capabilities and the more specific operational requirements, and at the best cost with the best industrial opportunities. The same process was followed in the U.S., U.K., Australia, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Italy, and Turkey within the MOU. Israel is on board outside the MOU and Japan, South Korea and others are poised to follow suit.

Planes won't go away.

I call them murderers for ordering our soldiers aboard the sea king. Every death after Chretien's fateful decision is laid at his feet.

Finally under Harper our troops are being equipped more appropriately. I mean they actually have desert camo for Afghanistan! And real armored transports! Our soldiers are no longer an embarrassment to the nation.

Today our F-18s patrol the skies in Libya under the sanction of the UN, but it was the stealth bombers and attack jets who went in first and cleared out radar and anti aircraft capabilities. We have none

The Canadian Debate is On!

We are in week 2 of the campaign. There are strategies afoot you and maybe I are unaware of.

With the Liberals swinging decidedly left it has been gobbling up NDP voters. Sadly they will be the true losers I am afraid.

There are some Con riding's that feel pretty safe. My MP won with 68% of the vote, for example.
I am sure there may be other riding's more concerning to the party. But it would be a mistake to say it falls all at the feet of Mr. Harper, or Party strategists. Ridings like mine are as concerned as anyone about strategic ridings. We would like to see more people participate in bringing in that Conservative majority in May. Why? Because of the issues. One could almost say Canada's escape from the greatest recession ever could almost be described as miraculous.

All parties wanted deficit spending stimulus then complained because of a deficit. To think that Canadians aren't smart enough to do the math... We have had exceptional economic leadership. Canadian spending last year came in 14B UNDER budget. We will make the deficit targets. Compare Canada's deficit to any of the Western economies, and we shine.
With the US at 4 Trillion now, Canada's deficit under a left wing government would not be 50B, it would be 350B. And now Iggy has ardently followed that path with an 8 billion dollar first step.

I can't help but wonder if families first would benefit most with an 8B dollar tax cut? Wealth redistribution has never been a Liberal strong suit. It would be only a matter of time before we would see envelopes stuffed with cash doing its same thing to our country.

Canadian International Standards, visa vis Amnesty International.

Saskatchewan Soul

7:48 AM on April 1, 2011

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Saskatchewan Soul.Show DetailsHide Details

Yes it is a major election issue for me too. And, for his faults, we all know Ignatieff is light years better than Harper on this stuff. Anybody dealing with international conflict or human rights knew Michael Ignatieff long before he became a politician.

Please wait while we perform your request.

This will remove the comment from our system.

Alethia

2:32 PM on April 1, 2011

@Sask Soul: Are you kidding me? Did you actually hear what Ignatief said post 9/11? Did you hear how he justified extraordinary rendition? Guantanamo?
Man, don't get lulled to sleep by inane ravings of thumbstickers.

What would Canada do if the UN, and Amnesty just went too far? And then went further? And Further? Rights are very special things. We don't give people rights, we recognise them. They exist before being put to paper. But what if we run out of rights to put to paper? A lot of people could be out of a job...

This contempt charge is not criminal. It is procedural.
Its closest, but still poor, analogy is a contempt of court charge... 50 bucks and sit down and be quiet.

This is trumped up by partisan politics. Previous Liberal governments did much more with impunity because they held the majority. Normally this sort of theatrics wouldn't see light of day.

Debate on the G &M.

Most Corporations in Canada are small mom and pop operations just trying to feed their kids. They get to pay taxes twice. Once at 18% and again at whatever their income tax rate might be. People seem to assume corporations automatically = huge multi-nationals worth billions. We do have a few in Canada however. And more thinking of moving here if the rates go down.

Iggy beating this drum is bad timing given 60 min last night. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7360932n&tag=related;photovideo

Debate on the G &M.

Do the math? Well, Mr. Harper's budgets do anticipate our economy will grow. Hence our tax revenues will be better. But most people are not calculating the tar-sand production and its direct contribution to Canada's bottom line. The pipe lines still have not been built. Pipelines that will run for 100 years. Canada will be more like the Gulf Emirates than most of us can imagine. The difference being a significantly better distribution of wealth through our social programs. The 30 billion dollar jets start being delivered in 2018, with Cash on Delivery. They will keep coming until 2025. 30 billion even that inflated estimate by the liberal appointed budget officer, over 7 years is handle-able.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-unveils-income-splitting-plan-ignatieff-blasts-five-year-delay/article1959804/comments/

Globe and Mail 1000+ submissions.

5 elections in 10 years...

Canada has spent 900 million on elections it wouldn't have if we hadn't descended into successive minorities.  Any positive outcomes from a minority are long stale.  We need a majority.  The BQ is the spoiler, but it still can be done if everyone wakes up and smells the coffee.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-unveils-income-splitting-plan-ignatieff-blasts-five-year-delay/article1959804/comments/

A Facebook Debate:

Owen Abrey I don't buy the parliamentary democracy spin employed by the opposition parties. No other PM has survived in Minority position than Mr. Harper. Minority governments don't tend to survive long. Mr Harper, to his credit, has used every lever of our democracy to survive. You have to admit his moves have been brilliant. Not necessarily popular but necessary anyhow. So we only have 5 elections in the past decade not 6. All of the levers he used were laid down in Parliamentary legislation that was duly voted on by Parliament and the Senate. To say it is undemocratic is foolishness.a few seconds ago ·

F-35 controversy again.

The F-35 has a radar profile of a baseball at the speed of sound."

The Super Hornets are nice planes without a doubt.  But they would die without seeing what was attacking them.  Missiles are launched from 10s of miles away.  A steal jet gets them off while still being off the radar.  No radar, no missile launch.

The $ figure for the purchase of the f-35 is almost the same as the DIFFERENCE  between the budget Office ESTIMATE of the deficit 2010, and what the ACTUAL deficit.  We saved about that much last year.
The Budget Office predictions have been somewhat bizarre of late, almost partisan-if not thoroughly pessimistic.

Canada sent 6 planes to the Libya mission. 6.  Pathetic.  Why only 6?  Was the the number available to fly?  The rest in the shop?

Canada isn't paying 6.9 Billion to 30 billion up front.  We don't start paying until 2018, and pay only on delivery.  It might be 2025 before we get all 65 planes.

Canadian companies are going to earn 12 billion + supplying parts for 3,000 planes.  While the Budget Office was large on its cost estimates, it didn't allow for the tax revenues Canada will earn from its aeronautics sector.

Countries who are feet-dragging today will be clamoring tomorrow.

On the opening night of the Libya engagement, B2 Stealth bombers flew with impunity against enemy radar installations--quickly taking them out.  That is the advantage of stealth.  Previously unavailable to Nato and its allies, we now have an opportunity to acquire the technology.  Canadians war-gaming with the US, our f-18s against f-22s (stealth) were completely wiped out without seeing it coming.
10 years ago our pilot's skills would assure this would never happen.  Today is bad, tomorrow will be worse.

Lybia Dilemmas

Alethia
Predicaments: I can appreciate how it may be difficult for some to relate accordingly to this debate. To do so, really looks for persons who are old enough to remember Khadafi the terrorist. To have friends or family who died on that airliner explosion. To recall the rantings of that madman who vowed to destroy the west. Khadafi has been on a short leash ever since, the world forestalling its judgment largely because he has hidden behind Lybia's national skirts. Applauding the revolutionary movement of late, the west became committed. To back off, to allow the slaughter of the poorly armed previously peaceful demonstrators, would in effect unleash Khadafi to bring international terrorism to new levels. We could not go backwards, even if we wanted to.

The Canadian Voter

Quandaries: 1) Will Canadians vote largely because of economic management? 2) Will Canadians agree the Conservatives are anti-democratic and untrustworthy?

I think most Canadians are in camp #1, for a few reasons: Holding position #2 requires a fair amount of reading to come to an objective conclusion. I don't mean this with disrespect, but will the busy, working-to-survive Canadians take the time to do that research? No, I think if they vote at all they will vote from the gut & vote for economic stability.

The matter is compounded by the Canadian response to Libya. Canada is fighting for the fledgling democracy movement. How does that square with being undemocratic? Canada's response was the death-nell for that hope. Watching the TV, or vids on the internet will show Canada fighting for democracy. Reading through commons debate just doesn't cut it.  Voting from the gut is more easily founded in what one sees rather than what one hears/reads.

The angst: Canadians on the one hand will be swayed by the 6 planes (gah! 6 what a pathetic resposne!) that we sent. But the alternative would be that in reading up on the commons debate, one is left to conclude the matter at best is smoke and mirrors from opposition dominated committees.

The inane disconnect between Canada's deficit spending and history.

Sometimes we are too quick to forget. The fall of 2008 thru 2009 was disastrous on a global scale. All parties were demanding a deficit spending response. 50B was a number all parties agreed to--for the Libs, PQ and NDP, they were dubious because they thought it too little. The 50B was a starting point. In retrospect it worked as it should have. If Canada's deficit were equal per capita to the US stimulus, the deficit wouldn't be 50B, it would be 300B.
But hey it isn't fair comparing Harper's decisions with President Obama. So go look at Brittain.

On Prisons

It is a well-known fact the use of Marijuana heightens anxiety with continued use. I suppose this is exacerbated by the chronic fear of being busted. I think it should be legalized. However, it is almost humorous to read the neurosis in comments about this being a prelude to rounding up all the pot smokers and putting them in these new jails.

The issue is that Canadians are sick and tired of criminals being released from jail because of the fact we have no more space. My pot smoking friends, think of that pedophile that just moved in next door. He is out for good behavior.

In the earliest days of conservative government under Harper, it seemed political pundits were extolling the merits of a minority government, since the government was required to cooperate with the opposition.  Additionally, a minority made sure that the government behaved itself and sought moreso to have the approval of the country via inter-party cooperation., since at any time they could be dragged into another election.

We saw this when the government changed its position on deficit spending in the face of world wide collapse.  The opposition demanded it.  The government agreed to go along with them.  Canada took on a 50+Billion dollar deficit to fund direct stimulus. Another issue was Canada's military withdrawal in Afghanistan. The vote in the house was respected by the government, and only when the Liberals became vociferous about it, we stay, -- a compromise plan was made where we would leave military/police trainers.  This was the quintessential example of cooperation in the house.
Because the conservatives formed the government, over the course of half a decade, they  were able to shift the partisan balance in the Senate.  The Senate previously was a lever the Liberals could use to stall legislation, because of all the senators who were appointed by them for decades prior.  Now that they have lost control of the Senate, the opposition have reverted to ruling Canada from the committee. Since all parties are represented in committee, in proportion to their seats in the house, the government is never able to move legislation through the committees.  They are at the behest of the opposition.

These facts bring to an end the effectiveness of minority government in Canada--because government cannot function in the face of  partisan obstructionism on this level.  Legislation is routinely passed in the house and senate, but tied up in committee.  How is that serving democracy?  Parties voting for something when in the public eye, but nixing the same legislation in private.

Mr Day Retires

Mr Day is well loved in his Okanagan riding.  Not because of his party or political affiliation so much as he works very hard for his constituency.

I thought it took a lot to hang in there despite the political wringer.
He is a hero because of that in my mind.

A politician can say aliens created life on the planet, if they demonstrate the kind of integrity Stock did for us--any day of the week.  I see parliament diminished somewhat with his retirement.

Contempt of Parliament? Media seems to think we are too stupid to be able to read...

Odd, that the Toronto Sun and the rest of the media in Canada cannot read.

Actually there is no contempt of Parliament. Could there be at some point, theoretically it is possible. But in point of fact, the matter is referred to committee. If your readers read carefully, they possibly might be able to strain that fact from your spin.

To expose the truth, the matter is going to committee, no doubt stacked by opposition MPs. Of course that partisan fact won't change or modify the truth of the matter at all... (sic). After the decision/rendering of the committee, the matter goes back to the speaker and a final battering in parliament. It is more likely an election will be called before that happens. When the writ is dropped...

Partisan Spin.

Canadians have been fed so much spin, its a wonder they know what to believe. Those of us who are partisan, will choose our respective sides and buy into the appropriate spin. Few of us will actually know the truth of the matter.

It is understandable that Brittan calls a minority parliament a hung parliament. For Mr. Harper to survive so long shepherding successive minorities is more than a matter for Guinness. It is walking on water. It is a wonder Canada has been able to advance at all under such a conflicted battlefield.

With the Conservatives at 40% on the latest polls, maybe Canada can finally get a majority government. We have needed one for too long

Canadian Political Summaries and Opionion from the National Post:

6. Minority governments usually fail far earlier than this one. Instead of 18 months, this government still stands. That they used what seemed to be every lever available to them to maintain power, is more of a service to Canada than a disservice. They have given it a heroic stand. They have gone all out. If other parties at other times had been as savvy, perhaps they could have survived longer than 6 months.

The most significant thing you missed Kelly, is to note the process of power shift. The most significant power shift that the government has achieved is the shift in the senate. Since the power to appoint senators rests with the government even though it is a minority. It is true a majority government has fewer headaches than a minority. The key obstruction in parliament right now is the parliamentary committees. In a majority, the majority party maintains the majority in committee. That makes it futile for opposition parties to thwart the legislation passed in the house and senate. That means that opposition parties can't get away with the behavior they have today, and committees functioned as they were designed to do--on the assumption of a Majority Government.

Today however, an opposition party need only absence themselves from a vote in the house on camera, then or mangle the legislation or delay it in committee until the next throne speech effectively killing it. There is nothing MPs of the house can do about it. And, because it happens in the warrens and back rooms of parliament rather than on the floor of the house, Canadians are largely oblivious to it

Election Speculation with Numbers:

Your Dreaming Dave.  The greatest peril for the Liberals in BC, is a cavalier culture of entitlement.  Interesting that the Provincial Liberals and Federal Liberals are so much alike.

BC is like the rest of Canada.  The only question is: Do you want to see your MP in government or opposition?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/from-pre-writ-polls-to-election-day-history-is-not-on-ignatieffs-side/article1922972/comments/

Corporate income tax assumptions.

Too often, reporters and the churn that read them overlook a fundamental flaw in their assumptions visa vis Corporations.  Most Corporations are mom and pop shops fixing our cars, raking our leaves, washing our windows, cleaning our toilets, welding our pipelines, growing our food, discovering new medicines, manning our restaurants, and so on.  The failed assumption is that "corporations" are big international things like banks and mining companies, grocery chains, and Canadian Tire.  Businesses like Banks and oil companies should have their heat held to the fire perhaps.  But Corporate taxes mean if I take a profit, make 60,000.00 per year, that money is taxed twice: once at 17% and once at almost 50% with provincial income taxes included.

About Libya and the political unrest sweeping the muslim world.

The thing that bothers me, is that if we are encouraging democracy how is it a few thousand protesters are deemed enough to vote for millions of others in the country?  As much as change may be needed, are the countries of the world giving ear to hooliganism?  It is good to see youth with such energy and optimism--surely old corroded regimes long past their prime need renewal.  But will the future political systems that arise from protests be toppled so easily?

Crysalis and the Liberals

This one is entertaining John.  Several years ago I said the Liberals were heading to the woodshed.  From a Conservative perspective Iggy was a terrifying force.  A force that ultimately fizzled.  The Liberals emerged from the woodshed too soon.  The necessary chrysalis was aborted before the transformation could occur.  Pity.  Had party mandarins not been in such a rush to force a liberal prime-minister on the country so soon after their corruption was manifest.  Even if he had potential, the timing was a disaster.  Of course, those party mandarins weren't getting any younger.  But the orderly transfer of party leadership has often been rather messy instead--particularly one so mortally wounded.

Running debate on the Globe and Mail Sex and Religion article.

Alethia

2:55 AM on February 13, 2011

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show DetailsHide Details

Unfortunate choice of title, but the article itself wasn't too far off. Fornication is not the same a sex, neither does the article contain the word. Perhaps the title was mashed onto the top of it by an editor.
Modern Christians see the Stoicist philosophy and its influence in the early church as flawed. The upshot of Stoicism created sad excess. From self-flagellation to monastic desert cells, and even finally celibacy, a healthy appreciation of sexuality has eluded much of Christianity to its harm. Today there is a Renaissance of healthy sexuality in the church at large. There will always be the Bristol Palins who will be held up and the flawed example exploited, speaking of straw men... All of these fall far from the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. Even though St. Paul lists fornication as carnal, there was no teaching of monasticism, stoicism, self flagellation or celibacy. In fact the writings of the Apostles steer a course between Stoicism and 1st century Epicurianism. The modern equivalent of Victorian Prudism, vs Hedonism. Neither extreme was embraced and both were criticized.

3 replies1 reply 3 replies1 reply Please wait while we perform your request.

You voted

Abuse Reported Report Abuse

 

Score: 1

Name withheld

MarkNS

3:14 AM on February 13, 2011

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore MarkNS. Show DetailsHide Details

Good thing "Modern Christians" have you, Alethia, to tell them what they think.
Of course, your version of Christianity is the "right" one.
Wait a sec...isn't that what they all say?

You voted

Abuse Reported Report Abuse

 

Score: 2

Name withheld

witness1

3:23 AM on February 13, 2011

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore witness1. Show DetailsHide Details

I hope that within my life, I witness the end of religion by whatever name; its leaders and their overbearing, sanctimonious prattle about everthing one must do to please the magic sky-fairy.

Please wait while we perform your request.

This will remove the comment from our system.
OK Cancel

You voted

Abuse Reported Report Abuse

 

Score: 0

Name withheld

Alethia

1:49 PM on February 13, 2011

This comment has been removed from our system.

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Alethia. Show DetailsHide Details

MarkNS: People participate and give their point of views. I never said my idea was the right one to the exclusion of others. I am sorry if they refuse to fit the "ticky-tacky" boxes of your stereotypes.

Witness1: Voltaire predicted it would happen in his life time a few centuries ago. Perhaps you will be the ones to wish it away. Every generation lies in the same peril. If the people who claim faith die and there are no others, then Christianity would be dead.

Some describe its truth to be existential: only known in the experience of it. Some as metaphysical: existing outside of what is empirically measurable. Certainly for anything to live in the currently hostile climate, it would take a miracle.

Delete

The peril facing the Liberals is related to their dire need for renewal. Stelmach should loom large in their minds or they will be repeated in BC style. Insiders with connections to the old guard should be the last people nominated to lead. To survive the next election, this party must pass the sniff test--something that would be impossible if a leader arises attached to the cabinet, and the BC Rail affair.

So Ignateff has his finger on the pulse of what worries us eh?

The Politics of Fear.

The way to move the complacent voter. Admit it, Canadians have been fairly satisfied, and with good reason. Compared to all the other nations of the world, our ship is right side up. I think complacency will be the biggest problem next election, we feel too good.

So bring on fear. Fear lower tax rates mean lower revenues/jobs. Create a secret agenda/you can't trust him neurosis--hoping that line hasn't been too over-used the past 5 years; will Canadians actually still buy it?

Bring on fear that Canada will cease to care for the old, sick, and disabled among us. But there is one fear we can put to rest, at least the current party hasn't stolen 40 million dollars with impunity from the public purse.

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/Guest+column+Iggy+gets+voter+worries+better+than+Harper/4223115/story.html#comments#ixzz1D1z980SG

CTV discussion on Flagherty.

Short Memories:
@Debt is not fiscally conservative:
Fiscal conservatives hate debt.  But realistic, fiscal, conservatives recognized that in a time of economic collapse, Canada needed to stimulate the economy.  I am puzzled why so many posters forget that it was an all-party motion that made the decision to do deficit spending.
Examine the difference between Canada and the US.  Canada's economy is about 1/10, its population 1/10, and until recently, its debt about 1/10th that of the US.  The Liberals south of the border turned on the taps.  3.2 trillion dollars in deficit later, their printing presses are still running around the clock.  If Canada didn't have conservatives minding the hen house, our deficit wouldn't be 56B, it would be 320B--about 1/2 of Canada's total debt right now.

More Essays on the F-35 project.

This aircraft is right for Canada for many reasons:
It is gen 5.  That is a real designation, not a selling pitch.
It has a flight profile of a speeding soft ball going mach 1.4.  The F-22 is better, (a speeding marble) but is unavailable to anyone but the US.  Production has ceased.
The Pak-FA, and the Mig 35 are the Russian answer to the threat of gen 5.  First test flight was 1 year ago.  3 exist, only 1 flies.  We are 5-10 years ahead technologically.
China just unveiled a stealth plane.  We have little information on its capabilities.  It is probably the true threat.  Since China could easily ramp up production and produce these very cheaply.  65 planes would never hold their own against a Chinese Airforce of 1000s of planes.   Nato is planning on producing 3300.  Will it be enough?
I don't know.  It would take a vivid imagination to see Canada buying a Russian or Chinese plane.  Impossible so long as we are part of NATO.
The Lockheed F-35 was chosen in a competition that ended in 1996.  Everyone is not happy with the price increases.  However, the F-22, that the allies drool over, costs twice as much as the now inflated price of the F-35.
In a recent war game all our F18s were wiped out facing F35s and 22s.  We didn't get a shot off.  We never saw them.  We lost 100%.  That's what stealth does.  Technically our 30 year old F-18s fly faster, higher, further (only in cruise mode--tactically, it is less that the F-35 in terms of range)
But that is not what will win the next war.
To buy the newer F-18s would be stop-gap at best if you stretch it, because they will just as easily be shot down as our current ones.  That would be the real waste of taxpayer money.  This is the same with the Eurofighter and Gripen.  These planes are 4-4.5 gen at best at costs close to what we are paying for the F-35.
To make a modern fighter takes decades and hundreds of billions of dollars.  We have (and the Liberals first signed us on to this) agreed to cooperate on the design and building of this plane with our allies.  The costs are to be borne by all of us.  There is no way Canada would have a chance at this plane otherwise.
To think about anything else is akin to strapping your seat to a Sopwith--a no worse option than driving our existing planes into the ground.  They already are starting to fall from the sky.
When you want to go buy a Chev, or a Dodge you go down to the dealer, shop around a few dealerships to get the best price.  But if you want a Lamborghini, they tell you what it will cost, and after you pay for most of it you are on a 6 month waiting list for your car to be built.
Canadians have been led by the Liberals and NDP to think Chev, when we have been going after Lamborghini.
These are the reasons I am convinced we are making the right move.

1967?  That is the year Canada died--having been hijacked by socialists whose failed vision was financial disaster for the country, after failed "visionary" disaster after another.
Ok we get that Janice is in bed with Jack, but must we put up with the ridiculous?  We have been 5 years into a series of minority governments.  To have "vision" in that setting is to lose a confidence motion.  Get real.  Without a majority, at best incremental progress is the survival tactic.

2% reduction in GST instead of elimination.  Upgrade of the military made possible because Canadians were embarrassed by their condition after "visionary" neglect.  Nothing vision-less about lack of corruption:  Compared to visionary government of the past, a breath of fresh air.  An economy that is not in tatters: Now there is a thought.  How boring.  If we were as "visionary" as the classical, sterling example of the president to our south, our deficit for the past 2 years would be 300 billion dollars.  But in true visionary style, as all mirages do, substance vanishes away.

If that is vision, you can keep it.


_____________________

@Stepnlll, I agree that Quebecers are known for voting strategically. However, they also are known for letting their emotions get in their way. Remember, the CPC failed to win many seats in Quebec mostly because, in the last weeks of the campaign, Mr. Harper made the disastrous arts funding cut back. Seats that may have gone CPC for strategic reasons, flipped to BQ instead.

How much will change when they realize the CPC has a majority? It will be hard for the strategic voter to resist. For all its separatist instincts, it sure hates being on the outside of power looking in

NDP wants senate reform.

The NDP want to have senators?  Let them get themselves elected.  The PM will appoint senators elected...  Otherwise quit crying in your soup Jack.

What is really going on is that the Left has lost control of the upper house.  No longer can they count on the senate to block legislation they held their nose and passed in the HOC.  It makes them uncomfortable because their hypocrisy can no longer fly below the radar.

Reform is coming.  It has only become possible recently with the balance of power in the upper house shifting.  But instead of being only possible, it is certain with a Conservative majority.

Medical Care in the 3rd world.

If you could spend even a week in a clinic in Darfur, or the hundreds of other places where health care is offered in the 3rd world, you would realize how biased the Western view on medical care is. When the health needs are so basic by so many people, most western medicine is irrelevant--Not to say we can't help. But we come offering a high level of care, when the people need just the basics (I can't find a word that describes anything lower than the term).
For many for example, where the biggest medical need is clean water, we are setting up abortion clinics. Are there any doctors without borders who can comment on this?

Supreee courts declines Election timing lawsuit.

@conducto274: Did you manage to read the article BEFORE commenting?  Or are you repeating lies; or are you completely illiterate?

The law clearly reads: "Subject to an earlier dissolution of Parliament."  A minority government can be dissolved virtually at any time.  By a failed confidence motion or the will of the Prime Minister.
The law's intent was to make it that in Canada, 4 years is the longest a PM can serve without another election.  The language is very clear.

The Demise of the NDP?

An interesting repose John. It is too bad that the press of necessity can seem to compromise idealism: Especially when the utopia of the idealist fails to emerge. This is the problem of the untested thesis. It may sound good until you learn the facts. The brutal reality of a devastating economy can do that to you. Or learning the math behind power consumption, so necessity causes you to change to what needs be done. It remains to be seen what the future looks like for the lib-dems, If the membership has abandoned it, I suppose those who are left can effect a permanent merge. Perhaps this is the future of the NDP. Perhaps they will ultimately merge with the Liberals. Perhaps we are seeing their falling in the polls to be pointing in that direction, but then again the Libs don't seem to be gaining much if anything from its demise. Perhaps that is an indication that the Libs are drifting left, grabbing NDP as they move on the one side, but shedding equally to the center on the other. The dominance of the Bloc, the choke hold it is to Canada demands the 3 party system of yesteryear give way, if we are ever to have a stable government again.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/01/12/john-ivison-british-precedent-bodes-ill-for-ndp/#ixzz1B8quHUBJ

Slavery promoted by the Old Testament?

The Old and New Testaments did not promote slavery. They merely commented on them. Slavery in the ancient near east was normal. If you weren't a slave, you likely had them. All western capitalist concepts cannot be imposed on ancient history. It does violence to the texts. That said, if anything Old and New Testaments sought a higher sort of kindness and justice than was the norm.
It was the Quakers (A Christian sect) who in 1657 began the question of slavery. By the American Revolution there was no Quaker who owned a slave

Read more: http://life.nationalpost.com/2011/01/11/are-some-atheists-more-%e2%80%98religious%e2%80%99-than-they-realize/#ixzz1ArlqtfDM

Faith and Atheism.

Thought worthy.  I am not sure of your initial premise, Atheism is as old as at least David: "The fool says in his heart there is no God."  The same polemic existed before Newton, as reflected in Pascal's Pensees.  I do think that in its eagerness to integrate with the science--especially in the enlightenment period, too much was forced.  Though the church cannot be wholly blamed, for even the Renaissance spoke of theology that it was the queen of the sciences.  The bifurcation that developed in the late 19th century and early 20th century should have had no attempt to co-opt each other--though that is better seen in retrospect.
Today, Christianity has found that it is about purpose, and its sister about process.  The nuance and paradox needs be appreciated.  That way, whether it is images from the Hubble or Data from the Large Hadron Collider, can still inspire awe whether or not that person is a person of Faith.

http://life.nationalpost.com/2011/01/11/are-some-atheists-more-%E2%80%98religious%E2%80%99-than-they-realize/

Sarah Palin and Guns and Hate.

Love or hate her, this has gone too far.  We target metaphors to put issues in the crosshairs all the time.  Rifle through any literature and witness the canon that uses imagery like this routinely.  Sure Sarah has bombed some of her comments, any other person on the plane would receive better treatment.
Let me start another bullet, the argument is not shot yet.  This is a powder-keg issue that will have the opposite effect for gun detractors, who clearly have crassly seized the opportunity to make the tragedy count for maximum effect.  There is something about all of this that makes me recoil.

Ms Palin

Before we resort to blaming the world's ills on Ms. Palin, I think there ought to be some honest non-partisan assessment.  Ms. Palin would never condone this.  While the cross-hairs issue was inappropriate, it was appropriately removed.  Did we really believe she ordered it?  We use the term "targeted" for every thing from politics to environment issues, but we all do so without considering what we say.

Canada is not in a structural deficit.  A structural deficit is what Trudeau left us with.  A structural deficit is related to normal federal government function, not stimulus spending.  The government does not rely on the deficit monies.  But it has helped many hard working Canadian families.

In comparison with the deficit spending in the US, Canada's deficit is remarkably low.  In fact, if we were to run a deficit according to our relative size, we wouldn't be talking 50 billion, we would be posting a deficit of 260 billion dollars--about half of Canada's current total debt from all time.

On Inquisitions

It is very easy to lens history from the modern/post modern standpoint.  It is to err to impose current perspectives and philosophies on a time they did not exist.  Consider for example the influence of Erasmus, described by some as the father of humanism:  It is difficult to imagine a time when the life of any peasant had no value--when death was such a small thing.  Reminds me of the jihadists of today who deem the women and children they bomb to be insignificant.   Today's Western value of human life did not exist in the early middle ages.
The next critical aspect of the Galileo age, relates to the philosophy of science itself.  Today's science is so based on empiricism that when we ask why a tree grows, we answer in a way related to cellular biology, which is a post empiricist perspective.  Prior to Galileo, the reason a tree grows did not deal with process, it dealt with purpose.  Galileo and Copernicus's work was to refute the tombs of "scientists" who predicted the position of the stars and planets for the purpose of astrological prediction.  Since no king would go to war if the stars were aligned against them, they paid handsomely for the advice and prediction of astrologer whose livelihood Galileo put at risk..  The church was outwitted by these charlatans and is guilty of inquisition because they were duped/bribed to take a position it paid very little attention to before-hand.  It was Galileo's contemporaries/scientists who were the majority of popular science of the day--who were really his enemies.  Even today to stand against the press of popular scientific opinion can mean a scientist must weather an inquisition of his own.  In that regard modernity and the dark ages aren't so far apart.

Afghanistan Oh Afghanistan...

When Canada came home from WWII, we brought back over a million men; our air-force was the 3rd largest in the world, our navy the 4th. Now it is a sacrifice of mind-blowing proportions to have 3,000 men in Afghanistan.
We have lost 150+ good soldiers in the last 9 years. We lost 10,000 in the first 4 hours of Vimy Ridge. Were their lives any less precious?

My point is that we began this war, pretty much all of Nato, trying to field a force as minimal as possible. While it is notable that Canada accepted the Kandahar assignment the hardest responsibility, unfortunately we didn't have the numbers to handle it. We were forced to focus a smaller area within the Khandahar district. And we are still there 9 years later--longer than any war we have ever fought.

My question is: What would have happened had Canada the capacity to land 1,000,000 men--properly equipped, would we still be fighting?

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/02/hercules-kandahar.html#socialcomments#ixzz19vbELVgu

Carl Ek

When I first spoke to band director Mr.Sieppe, he said "bassoon and oboe are needed." At the other end of the room I saw Owen playing the Horn. I asked you, Owen, about the Horn, and you explained all the wonderful things. So I thought, "...I think I'll play the Horn with Owen".

That's the reason I chose the Horn. I wonder what would have been had Owen been playing a bassoon... Thanks for having a Horn in your hands that day, Owen!