shoop

Yeeeeeesh, what a load of crap. As much as what you suggest *could* happen ... it really wouldn't. Ever. Believe it or not, Government cannot do whatever it wants with the way it presents financial figures. No accountant would sign off on accounting for futurre payments in a current year. It would not be accepted and Bay Street would simply perform the calculations and the real figure would become the conventional wisdom. The Finance Minister would lose such credibility that it would materially effect the market's confidence in the Government (and the economy as a result). There is no credibile scenario for presenting a budget surplus in the way you outline.

Wow, you are deluded aren't you? The Conservatives are not going to govern like the Liberals, fear of "falling" at every turn which lead to Martin peddling his arse with every piece of legislation. The opposition parties get that and aren't pushing the brinksmanship and making him look like a fool. Really? Which program have the Conservatives started that lead to money being funnelled to Conservative Party of Canada operatives? Or is it you just disagree with their policies so you are trying to equate them to the theft under the Liberal Party of Canada. Hmmm, guess the longest peacetime economic expansion we are currently experiencing has nothing to do with the increase in cross-boarder trade. What they have is a history of setting economic and regulatory conditions that help ALL Canadians. Brian Mulroney, Greenest living PM. GST, the tax the Liberals campaigned against yet campaigned against its being cut. NAFTA, again the Liberals campaigned against it but never abrogated the deal. Maybe they ran out of time in the last 12 1/2 years.

You *said* the Conservative supporters were agreeing with your assertion, but you didn't provide any support for that. Harper has been working with local media instead of the National Press Gallery. There was a good discussion on this week's Question Period about the media issue. Because Harper has been effective in dealing with the local media people are seeing him on the news. So when they see a story with Harper interviewed/speaking/answering questions, the following story about Harper avoiding the press really lacks a little credibility. Who are these mythical "ad men" to whom you refer?

What a semantic joke this post was? Are you proving anything by pointing out the obvious? Do any of us care about your "oh so clever" attempts to justify your attacks by talking about respecting people's opinion? Your talk about respect would have a lot more credence if you didn't end the OP with this quote? Sounds a little antagonistic for someone who 'respects' other people's opinion.

oops, double post

I'm not arguing for the Government to build up an RRSP, but I still don't see your argument as a valid reason for not paying down the debt. wtf? Are you trying to compare the personal debt of Canadians to Canada's national debt? That is a valid point. That doesn't mean that your argument supports the assertion that the national debt shouldn't be paid down. Care to actually adress why you don't think the national debt should NOT be paid down?

There were other arguments made against this man, this report and the way it was covered. Any comment on those?

Hmmmm, still don't see the logic. We could pay off the debt in a much more realistic timeline than you laid out. Debt reduction will be part of the budget plan on Tuesday. How much gets paid down remains to be seen. But another payment will be made.

Very short-sighted. As Albertans we have to recognize tht the oil and gas won't last forever. We need to use some of the money to build for the future. I am in complete agreement with putting more money into the Heritage Trust Fund. This provides a cushion for the chance, albeit unlikely, of the price of oil and crash falling back to earth. It is pretty tough to raise taxes, especially in tough times.

Debt reduction is the one option that fairly deals with your objection. If a surplus truly is "ours" as rightful owners, who then owns the National Debt?

So you are willing to give an anonymous poster on a message board the benefit of the doubt based on one call for civility and nothing else, BUT you are still willing to give credit for the Prime Minister's track record in office for moderation? Hmmm, no bias there at all Has Harper been going slowly? Let's look at what he has done, and will have done by Tuesday. Introducing the accountability act, brokering a deal on softwood lumber, re-committing to Norad and a budget that introduces the GST cut plus the funding for a new childcare deal all within six weeks of the opening of the new Parliament. What would he have to do for you to say he isn't moving *slowly*?

They had a very good panel on Question Period about this issue today. Scott Reid was on and the harshest thing he could say was that the Conservative's will *need* the media onside when times get tough. Hmmm Scott, didn't help your boss too much did it? Harper was compared to Trudeau in his handling of the media. That seems like a pretty good thing for Harper. Trudeau pretty much always had a testy relationship with the media. He won three majorities, a minority and lost one election. Does that mean Harper is in line to win three majorities? Only time will tell.

Goes to show how pathetic Martin was as PM that you had to pick an accomplishment from his term as Finance Minister to crete the worst possible comparison.

Agreed Martin was far too poll-driven, but I believe that it did effect his performance in managing things. A poll-driven PM had his PMO decide on a case by case basis whether or not to lower the flag on the Peace Tower after the death of every soldiers death in combat. Harper has chosen to return to a standard protocol for all people. Martin didn't close a deal on softwood lumber for fear of criticism. Is everybody happy with this deal? No. Are the vast majority? It appears so. I love the argument that Harper will be *scary* *scary* *scary* in a second term. Any proof for that? If you are going to quote somebody like Shakeyhands you should look at his history of postings. Shakey rabidly attacks Harper "no matter what". Seems to me it is far better having a Government that is mired in a "scandal" over the protocol for lowering flags, as opposed to how many millions was diverted to party coffers in a bogus advertising scheme.

I don't think Harper will make any more appointments to the Senate. But if he does, I am pretty sure it won't be somebody who campaigned with Paul Martin last election... P.S., you are joking about having the "class" to be a senator? In what way does being a party hack make one classy?

The snippet of the story you posted doesn't really support drawing that conclusion. Do you have a link for the full story?

I said he would appeal to business because he does have experience in the corporate world. The Leafs are very big business, and he must would have made a lot of connections while he ran them. Because it is lacking in most candidates, experience in business is all that would really be necessary to appeal to the business community out of this lot. Brison, Dryden and Dion are the only three out of this lot with any significant business experience.

Agreed, that some of the things he has done appear a little bewildering at times. But they do appear to be part of a grand plan. Bringing Emerson on side makes sense now that the Softwood deal is signed. Even the seeming mistakes, flag flap, are being handled correctly. What are the odds Martin would have backed down on that one???

Only in response to the rabid Harper-haters who are never going to give him credit for anything. Remember that no Government receives 100% support for all decisions. Nothing wrong with supporting our Prime Minister from such pathetic partisan attacks. The pathetic John Reid criticism of the Accountability Act has been exposed for the partisan farce that it is on another thread. Calling it "blowing it" is sad and lame. The Government's popularity is up and they are making decisions that people agree with. Committing to an actual protocol on flags is a welcome change from Paul Martin's pathetic dithering while PM. Fool yourself all you want, but if Harper keeps approaching things with the focused and determined style he has so far, he will win a majority next year. The softwood lumber deal got the approval of the Premier's of the three major softwood lumber producing provinces and all the biggest firms in the industry.

Anti-circumvention clauses aren't unheard of. It totally makes sense. It's in place to prevent a province from changing policies that would materially effect the conditions of the industry as it relates to this deal. It also applies to state governments as well.

Hmm, can't really remember what the Russians said when they sold Alaska, 140 years ago but it wasn't about resources. It was about creating a buffer between Russia and the British Empire on the Northern Frontier. Do you have any background knowledge on this issue at all?

Tough to debate with an ideologue. So a deal that helps ensure employment is a bad thing? Whereas continuing to fight the Americans on this would have kept the stability of forestry jobs in limbo. Do explain oh enlightened one...

Wow, so typical of the ignorant Harper haters. Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Why are you denigrating Harper for his choice of religion? There is *NO* evidence that Harper thinkis "God will save us from environmental degradation". Better to attack the man, when the greenest PM in the last 40 years was a Conservative and Harper is determined to build on that great track record. Better that than the pathetic records of Chretien or Martin ... all talk, little action. Take a look at Harper's record as Leader of the CA, the CPC and the Government. He has never mentioned banning of abortion in situations of rape. Please keep your lies to yourself.

It will depend on public reaction. If it stays positive, thent hey will do so very quickly. Sad, sad, sad...

If you post an article from a source you should expect to respond to valid questions about the source. You proved my point. The story is the most prominent story on the CBC Web site. To find it on CTV.ca you had to click on the news section and scroll past *EIGHT* stories before the non-story was present. Care to explain the different editorial choices???