normanchateau

So you are complaining that Mr. Trudeau is using Mr. Harper's strategy of treating his party like a private fiefdom and ramming changes through? With whom did Mr. Harper consult before he eliminated the mandatory long form census? His party? I doubt it. Certainly not the electorate since it was never part of his platform. Mr. Trudeau is making it clear before an election where he stands. Mr. Harper should have done that with the census.

A 200 million dollar "loan" from the Harper government to Ukraine: http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-announces-220m-in-aid-to-ukraine-1.1728009 There are countries far more needy than Ukraine, for example, in parts of Africa. Yet Mr. Harper chose Ukraine for this handout. Why? In 2011, there were an estimated 1,209,085 persons of Ukrainian origin residing in Canada, This means Canada has the world's third-largest Ukrainian population behind Ukraine itself and Russia. Another example of Mr. Harper using taxpayer dollars to pursue ethnic votes.

Mr. Harper is a born-again member of the Missionary and Alliance Church. His church advocates for the conversion of Jews to Christianity. His church, like all Evangelical Christian churches, is a strong advocate for Israel. While Jews account for only 1% of the Canadian population, Evangelical Christians account for 10% of the population. Hence Mr. Harper's over-the-top support. Not surprisingly, Mr. Harper brought a huge entourage of Evangelicals to Israel at taxpayer expense. See: http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2014/01/28/why-did-10-evangelical-leaders-fly-with-harper-to-israel/ His church also strongly opposes the use of marijuana and not surprisingly, Mr. Harper's party remains the only major party in Canada to support criminalization of this plant. The NDP supports decriminalization while the Greens and Liberals support legalization.

So you think that the Supreme Court of Canada, the majority of whose members are Harper appointees, are "the left"? It would not surprise me if Harper appointed Vic Toews to the Supreme Court.. Vic Toews, a religious nut like Stephen Harper, is the fanatic who fired all non-Christian chaplains and replaced them with Christian chaplains: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/government-cuts-non-christian-prison-chaplains/article4591355/ Toews and Harper: religious zealots who mix politics with religion.

Latest Forum Research results of polling done April 28th and 29th: Liberals 39%, Conservatives 30%, NDP 20% Source: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/02/conservative_attack_ads_against_trudeau_not_working_poll.html To quote Keepitsimple: "...Canadians are starting to pay more attention to both Harper and Trudeau."

The Toronto Star is wrong if it fails to acknowledge that Mulroney was anti-apartheid. Mulroney, like Diefenbaker, was vocal in his opposition to apartheid. But the Toronto Star, like other mainstream media, has failed to point out that in 1989, Stephen Harper co-founded the Northern Foundation, a far right organization that supported the pro-apartheid government of South Africa. Perhaps this is why Stephen Harper has never declined to sign the nomination papers for Rob Anders every time there's a federal election. Even the Toronto Star lacks the balls to point this out.

Canada lead all G8 nations in economic growth during the years before Harper came to power. Source: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/050621/dq050621c-eng.htm It also helped that Harper inherited a surplus. Too bad he squandered it in 2007, long before the economic meltdown. See: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=bff9fecd-ed7d-47e6-b001-2a638620df42 Marginal income tax rates from 2007-2013 are not lower than they were in 2005 and they went up in 2006. Check your tax returns if you don't believe me. No wonder Harper has a terminal MA degree in Economics and did not advance to a PhD in Economics.

Fascinating and informative, especially your comment about Dr. Abbas writing a doctoral thesis on why the Holocaust never occurred. By any chance, do you have a citation for that?

The mainstream media supported Stephen Harper in 2011. None supported Ignatieff. They'll support Harper again in 2015. Conservative miscreants will be long forgotten and successful attack ads on Trudeau will allow the reprehensible Harper to be re-elected.

I never claimed that Israel accused Canada of being extreme. Israel made no such claim. However, Israel did object to Canada's UN stance against the Palestinian Authority. This stance was not helpful to Israel. Do you think it was?

StatsCan published figures on this in 2011. The 41% figure I mentioned came from here: http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/06/10/why-its-time-to-legalize-marijuana/

Alternatively, when the dust settles and the Conservative supporter-controlled media move on to focus on yet another Justin Trudeau "gaffe", Stephen Harper could quietly appoint Del Mastro to the Senate.

I think it depends on how you define "...have it in for Harper." If you mean by "...have it in..." that they supported the election of Stephen Harper, I would agree with you. I've cut-and-pasted a list of newspapers and magazines which published editorials supporting the election of Stephen Harper in 2011: The Brampton Guardian The Recorder and Times (Brockville) Burlington Post Calgary Herald Calgary Sun The Economist Edmonton Journal Edmonton Sun Etobicoke Guardian The Globe and Mail The Mississauga News The Gazette (Montreal) The Hamilton Spectator Inside Toronto Maclean's National Post Oakville Beaver Ottawa Citizen Ottawa Sun The Province (Vancouver) The Suburban (Quebec) Sudbury Star Toronto Sun The Vancouver Sun Waterloo Region Record Windsor Star Winnipeg Free Press Winnipeg Sun I haven't provided the lists for the 2006 and 2008 elections but I can say, and you can verify, that most of the publications above also supported Stephen Harper in 2006 and 2008. The Toronto Star endorsed the NDP in 2011. If you have a list of major newspapers which supported the federal Liberals in 2011, please produce it. Objective evidence of anti-Harper newspaper bias is difficult to obtain. Owners of major newspapers tend to be Conservatives and while their writers certainly criticize Harper at times, they also criticize Mulcair and Trudeau. I rarely see criticism of Elizabeth May but I doubt that's evidence of a pro-Green bias.

How did the myth arise that people are not charged for simple possession? While it's true that the Vancouver police rarely charge for simple possession, the RCMP and some police forces continue to arrest and charge. Since the election of Stephen Harper in 2006, simple possession arrests have increased by 41 percent Canada-wide. Even in British Columbia, with the exception of Vancouver, marijuana arrests have increased since Harper came to power. And even if the police were to stop arresting for mere possession, the law still permits a judge to sentence a person to six months in jail for possession of even trace quantities. If the law is not enforced, this leads to disrespect for the law. Why have such a law on the books? The Liberals oppose it, the NDP opposes it, the BQ opposes it, the Greens oppose it. Yet Stephen Harper and his Prohibitionist Party are stuck in the 1920's.

Don't expect a rational response. Those who support this government's war on science know that the best way to show their support is to deflect criticism, change the topic and engage in drive by sniping. And while you may view plagiarism as unethical, those who support Harper's war on science may see no problem in plagiarism and misattribution. A google search reveals that Stephen Harper himself plagiarized a speech on Iraq from former Australian PM John Howard.