Kitchener2

Of course, those with the capacity to read English will note that the only things I said about Harper are that he is from Etobicoke, that he went to the U of T, that he represented Calgary as MP for many years, and that his work has been chiefly headquartered in Ottawa and Toronto for over two decades now. These are not matters of opinion but of basic biographical fact. Since you seem to think I've been opining about Harper, this looks -- yet again -- like half a conversation you're having with an imaginary voice in your head. I highly recommend you make a strong effort to reply only to actual things your actual interlocutors have actually said. That is how human conversation works. And I am not new here, as it turns out. This is a new account with a modified name, but I was posting here years ago.

"the academic, media, artistic and political elites from the Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal corridor" Huh. Well, in one sense it's pretty impressive that you are able to mindread this huge and wildly disjointed group. As if the "artistic elite," whatever you mean by that, has anything particular in common with the contemporary political elite in "the Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal corridor"! A painter who can make ends meet through gallery shows and, say, Joe Oliver? Or Pamela Wallin, who is from Wadena SK herself, and of course knows that Harper is an Etobicoke boy, U of T dropout, and that he's has had jobs chiefly based in Ottawa and Toronto for over two decades? She's part of the "media elite" and the "political elite," and so she must somehow ignore the widely-known facts and believe that Harper is an Albertan! Mysterious and wonderful, these pronouncements. But the Argument From I'm Making This Up, Because I Said So doesn't really impress me. As a Westerner living in Ontario, and as a farm kid leaving in a city, I am well aware of the ignorance and antipathies that run in many directions across this great country; but the idea that some group you've confabulated out of whole cloth dislikes Harper because of Alberta something something, rather than that people who dislike Harper, of whatever career, and in whatever geographical region of Canada, do so because of his long-standing behaviour or policies, is an extravagant hypothesis that is mysteriously without evidence. If "socialist" has such evidence, well, keeping it a closely guarded secret while spouting incoherence is a remarkable choice.

See, this is yet another very good example. This looks like picking an obsession or talking point out of a long list of them, and plopping it down as if it were relevant to the conversation. It's like the other half of a conversation that's taking place in your head and not in the real world. Normally discussions proceed by each person's making a conversational contribution related in some manner to the one made by the person to whom they are purporting to respond. Most humans internalize these conversational norms effortlessly in early youth. So my question is whether you are aware of being unable to do this, and whether you've noticed that your political obsessions seem to have rendered you unable to sustain the linear thought necessary to carry on a rational exchange.

Genuine question here: Are you aware that you are completely making things up? That is, when you compare the things that I've written with things that you seem to intend as replies to what I've written, do you notice that you seem to be responding to some fictional third person who's written altogether different things? Is this a common thing with you, to respond to other voices you hear or read, and not to the things people have actually said? I invite you to examine the various bizarre statements you make above, directed at me, about various highly specific things you think I've said and done, and compare those things to the points I've actually made in this thread. If that comparison doesn't give you reason to think that your political ideologies have driven your judgement onto the rocks, I really don't know what would convince you.

You don't have to care about anything at all, as far as I can see. And you can riffle through the Angry Adjectives section of your thesaurus as fast as you like, in making various baseless pronouncements. Doesn't make your claims less demonstrably false, nor even intelligible.

Since only you know what you could mean by "glitterati," this is entirely obscure; it seems to be something you're making true by your own personal defintions, rather than a matter of fact. Certainly it's no secret to even basically politically informed people that Harper grew up in a Toronto suburb and went to U of T. If being from Ontario but representing an Alberta riding makes him an Albertan, then King's being from Ontario but for many years representing a Saskatchewan riding makes him a Saskatchewanian. (He was profoundly attached to the prairies and was a great booster of their development.) Move your goalposts however you like; your initial claims are just unwarranted.

Shouldn't your "reply" bear some relation to what you are quoting? But as for whether "If there's a Liberal / NDP Coalition, and the Liberals are still in majority in Ontario, then Canadians & especially Ontarians will flock from the country in droves": of course not. No more than they will move if Harper wins again, even though most Canadians don't want him as PM. Silly fantasies like this colour everything you say as ill-informed ideological nonsense.

You know Harper's from Etobicoke, right? And Mackenzie King, Canada's longest-serving Prime Minister, was MP for Prince Albert while leader of the Liberals.