shoop

You are totally correct. 40% approval rating isn't very high. The 41% figure from the OP was voting intention. Here is a link. Conservatives grow more popular. And a snippet from the story.

Hmmm, the CPC would be more than happy to head into an election with 40% approval rating. The day before, and the day the Liberals were defeated four National opinion polls showed the Liberals hovering between 31% and 36% support nationally ... with most of the polls skewing towards the higher end of that range. After an *atrocious* campaign the Liberals still received just over 30% of the vote. Not that much of a change at all. The CPC will run the next campaign with a solid, experienced team and a leader who has proven himself to be very Prime Ministerial and not as *scary* *scary* *scary* as everyone said he would If you can see the CPC consistently registering at 40% in the polls anytime after Kennedy wins the Liberal leadership you will see them engineer a defeat in the housed.

Wow. Great post. So much for Harper alienating members of the military.

The Government has made its decision. They have no control over what the families do at their private funerals. Very good point about using the flag situation for political gain. It's pretty sad what the Liberals are trying to do with this issue. But look for them to get lauded for being focused and dogged in opposition over the issue.

Hmmm, you keep repeating this line about paying as much in taxes as you do in tuition. But a combined $10k in a year, for taxes and tuition, isn't a lot compared to what most Canadians pay in taxes alone. How little do you want to pay for your education? We don't want to make the tax situation soooo advantageous that students stay in school forever.

The cameras were able to get pictures from outside the base. Not allowing cameras on the tarmac isn't censoring "all coverage". Right to know? I'm not familiar with that. Which section of the charter does that fall under? How little attention do you want to pay to the family's feelings?

Hmm, what is the definition of an ad hominem attack? When you can't find fault with the person's platform or performance you attack them on a personal level? Large ego ... sure. Does he still qualify as greatest living PM? Hmmm, Turner fought the FTA, not NAFTA and wasn't PM when he did it. Thanks for supporting my case!!!

You've crossed the line from devil's advocate to unsupported ranting. The amount of coverage of murder victim's families and the return of fallen soldier's bodies should be up to the families. Bad press behaviour on the one hand doesn't justify arguments against the Government's new protocol on the other. Where did you get the last part of your post? Seems like a pretty weak argument. Nobody is suggesting that and it isn't founded in reality. Is that a sign that you have nothing to actual rebut the counter-arguments with?

As typical of most rants, yours is a little difficult to follow. Are you saying that all students should be exempt from paying taxes? Tuition is still far less than the average Canadian pays in income taxes a year. Do you have any real idea what a pittance people in Alberta receive when they are on welfare? Or that you wouldn't qualify as a student?

It is a matter of respect for the families. If the families want the media to broadcast their son's funerals they have every right to do so. Why does the Government feel that it knows better than the media? Hmmm, the Government was elected and will have to face the people in another election. The media are not elected, and not accountable to anyone. I am much more comfortable with a government making decisions of this kind than the unelected, unaccountable media.

An editorial from the Post pretty much sums up the feelings of a lot of people about the NPGs whining. So much for solidarity. Continue the fight Julie Van Dusen! Here are the highlights of the editorial.

Respect for the dead over political expediency. Hmmm, sounds like a pretty defensible policy to me.

The Government is leaving it up to the families to decide. If the families want media coverage they can make the funerals open to the media. Craig Oliver tried to make the case that it was "bigger than the families" at this point? And the soldiers are now "part of the Canadian family". wtf? If the families want privacy, they can have it. If they want media to cover the funerals so family members who can't attend can watch they can. Sounds like a pretty fair compromise to me.

Agreed. and like bullies once they have lost power they try and resort to their bullying ways to gain it back. Doesn't look like it will work in this case!

The flags are lowered in a number of places, including the soldiers home base and the base they are serving at abroad when they fall in the line of duty. The Government is just standardizing the procedure for honouring these soldiers. Unlike the Martin government, where literally every case was brough to the PMO for a decision. Quite sad the Liberals using the commemoration of fallen soldiers to make political hay. Not very respectful IMHO.

There is the rub. Harper isn't ignoring the media, he is just choosing to deal with the media differently. It is snobbishness on the part of the National Press Gallery that the PM is choosing to deal with local media on many issues that has the NPG up in arms. The people are still getting their information. So no, he doesn't need to *establish contact* with anybody. Nobody cares about the issue other than the NPG.

There is a difference between a private member in opposition putting a motion forward and Government policy. Power to James Moore doing what he did at the time, but it wasn't Conservative party policy. Very interesting how Garth Turner was one of the only two Government MPs to criticize his Government on this issue. If Garth really has such troubles with Prime Minister Harper's Government, why did he choose to run as a Conservative in the first place?

I don't have much fear of that happening either. As long as there is the political will in Canada to stay the course on balanced budgets we will continue to do so. The way things stand a deficit budget would be political suicide for the CPC.

Don't really know who the better choices for that post would be. Edmonton is a major Canadian city. It deserves a seat at the Cabinet table. Ambrose also improves the gender balance of the cabinet. She is experience in Government and very good at her job. Who is the better choice? Balancing experience and regional representation among other considerations...

I don't know why you are hung up on the phrase "turning the debt into a fetish". Knowing the way government works, we need to have serious debt reduction targets. An incentive for not increasing program spending is needed. The Liberals $3B a year surplus targets are a little weak. According to Finance department estimates if achieved they would reduce debt to GDP ratio to 25% in 2015 and 20% in 2020. The Government will continue program reviews, thus holding the line on spending increases. Yes regulatory changes are needed. The CRTC does need to be reviewed. We have seen the benefits of reducing regulation from the Mulroney years. More needs to be done.

Dinning is a very good alternative to Manning. Much younger, more corporate experience and far more experience in provincial Alberta politics. What does "there is too much room for systematic error in an age so sensitive to chaos threory" mean???

The Mighty Oil played a solid game two to win in Detroit. Now they are going back home with a confident Dwayne Roloson, the pandemonium of Rexall Centre fans seeing their first playoff game in three weeks, last change to take advantage of line matchups and the bonus of younger legs for a serious that looks like it is going to last for a while. Could a Flames Oilers match up in round two be in the offing?

The Government made a promise. There was a demand for some sort of action on daycare. To address another post of yours, the Government's plan also includes the use of tax incentives to create private daycare spaces. Seeing as how you were so quick to cry foul, let's take another look at the forum rules. If you really want to appeal to the rules, best to stick by them yourself.

Your argument wouldn't lead to the belief that there is an appropriate level of National debt. At what level do you see that? I am not saying that we need to eliminate the debt tomorrow, but a commitment to reducing the debt is a good thing. Returning all surpluses to the taxpayers is nto good policy. The economy will turn down at some point in the future. This would lead to deficits ... not desirable or good policy. How to pay has to be the focus. If the upcoming budget didn't have that as a focus we would definitely be running a deficit.

Geoffrey, If we operated in a vacuum then your arguments about budgeting would have some credence. However, we don't operate in a vacuum. We are dealing with a huge national debt, a little under $500 Billion from the last figures I could find. I see it as a matter of responsibility. Just as tax money is our money as citizens, so is the national debt our debt as citizens. Total debt charges have dropped by $15 Billion annually since the last Federal deficit budget in 1995-96. While economic times are good we need to continue reducing the debt for a variety of reasons. 1. Leaving a debt for future generations, when we have the means to reduce it, is the ultimate of arrogance and self-centered behaviour. 2. Continue debt reduction creates more money for program spending down the road in the event of a major economic downturn. 3. Some people are always going to argue for less taxes regardless of the situation as you do in stating that surpluses result from "over-taxation"? Do you then agree that deficits are the result of "under-taxation"? Here's a prime example in Alberta. How can Calgary be the only major city in the country without a blue box recycling program? That is a new program with many, many benefits. A blue box program increases the amount of recycling, because some people just won't go to the community recycling centres.