SpankyMcFarland

I didn't bring up any secret agenda. Harper has definitely moved closer to Canada's centre to keep power. His main agenda is staying in power.

The emotion you bring here is similar to Harper's and shows your support for a kindred spirit. Harper has pursued a personal agenda on Khadr for some reason. Again and again, on small issues he distinguishes himself and sends a message to the base. His stance on prisons isn't small and his approach to emissions has ben fairly clear. The Liberals muddled along on that file whereas Harper has been more strident. I think a Prentice govt. would be less confrontational than Harper - not much different in substance but softer in tone. On the economy, Canada has had a broad consensus since Michael Wilson's time, so I don't see big changes comng in that area no matter who is in charge.

Hold on. This is about where Harper is on the spectrum not whether his position is correct or not. Harper created something new in Canada, an Office of Religious Freedom. I can't see any of his predecessors doing that. Actually, they didn't. His speech to the Knesset and his many statements on Israel have changed Canada's perceived position on the ME. Really, I can't see how one can conclude otherwise. He's not Jean Chretien.

I would put Harper definitely to the right of Prentice on the Christian issues spectrum and I think he would have a less confrontational style with the Supreme Court and would harbour grudges less intensely. I don't see Prentice seeking a photo op confrontation with Putin either.

He TALKS like a hardcore right winger on religion, Israel, Ukraine, Khadr, the Supreme Court.

That's a bit ambiguous. He's a lot better than the original.

Erin O'Toole has been doing excellent Fantino impersonations on Power and Politics for weeks now. He strikes the right note, not too cocky, and does not depend entirely on annoying talking points.

A New Year's resolution for Mr. Baird - stop telling us to 'listen' in every second sentence. And if Harper could cut down on 'look', that would be a nice bonus. Listening to Baird and Kenney back to back today on CBC, I couldn't help noticing that Jason gets through a lot more content per minute.

And I don't want to think what I'd be prepared to do or say to keep my pension.

In fairness, every MP must be tempted to do this in the heat of battle. Not the worst of political crimes.

In Canada, people don't seem to be nearly as focused on the swing in elections as they are in the UK. In the last two by-elections, for example, there was a big swing to the Liberals. That's what matters.

King ruled in a more deferential era. His weirdness was well concealed. If he had even been forced to face the occasional TV interview like Harper, he would have struggled.

Simples. Pay down the debt every chance you get.

Mr. Vickers was brave but there are some operational and administrative questions for him to answer. This could be awkward.

If Marc Garneau had won, something tells me he wouldn't be getting any softer treatment from our friends on the Right.

Fair enough. That is true right now but in five years time, drones will be dramatically more versatile. I would favour a lower cost plane now to fill in for the next 5 to 10 years.

The current military purchasing process has not been fit for purpose for at least twenty years. We just get completely bogged down in political point-scoring. Somehow, we need to remove it from the political arena after determining the budget limits and let the military choose what it needs. With that said, from my man in the street's perspective, the F-35 seems awfully expensive at a time when drones are rapidly expanding their capabilities.