normanchateau

Ah, you must be referring to this: http://dstewart.org/images/stephen_harper_village_peop.jpg

How could an MP like Ignatieff know about it? He wasn't living in Canada when it happened. Does every CPC MP know that Harper once belonged to the Northern Foundation or are they completely incompetent?

That's one hypothesis for Harper's lack of success in Toronto. Another is that Harper doesn't do well in cities where there are universities and a large proportion of educated citizens. The largest Liberal plurality in British Columbia in the last election was in Vancouver Quadra where the University of British Columbia is located. Montreal's university ridings voted Liberal. Edmonton Strathcona, where the University of Alberta is located, kicked out their CPC MP in the last election and voted NDP. Must be all those homos and immigrants in Edmonton.

Isn't religion wonderful? Protestants thinking their version of Christianity is superior to the Catholic version. Catholics thinking their version is superior. Christians thinking they're superior to Muslims, Muslims thinking they're superior to Jews...

Could it be that the "secular socialist" is actually Satan?

When Ignatieff becomes Prime Minister, either by leading a coalition or defeating Harper in the next election, I wonder what position Harper will occupy in the shadow cabinet of the Official Opposition. He certainly won't be leader. Finance? Energy? Or maybe he'll return to the National Citizens' Coalition as he did after his falling out with Preston Manning. Then again, he could rejoin the Northern Foundation if it still exists: http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Fron...2/11/02902.html

I believe my question in the last post was whether some Liberal supporters might actually be centrists rather than leftists, and not how does Harper compare in social beliefs to the leaders of foreign countries which attach greater importance to religion. The Pew Research Center has shown that the importance of religion in the US more closely resembles that of some African, Muslim and various third world countries than it does European countries. The importance of religion in Canada more closely resembles that of European nations: http://people-press.org/report/167/among-w...tions-%E2%80%A6 The US is unique among wealthy nations in that a majority of its citizens attach importance to religion.

"In the United States, the slogan today is, Yes We Can. In Canada, it's No You Can't. Try to imagine Harper having the grace and wit to do what Obama did on the eve of his inauguration: hold a celebratory public dinner for defeated Republican presidential candidate, John McCain." http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/575770

Speaking of which Harper delayed his own lawsuit against the Liberals for his claim that they defamed him by exposing his involvement in the attempted bribery of Chuck Cadman: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2...man-harper.html When Harper postponed it, he claimed it was because of the election. I wonder what bogus excuse he'll use next time. Here's a more likely reason why Harper "postponed" the defamation suit: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2...adman-tape.html

Your post implies that Liberal supporters are leftists. Is it possible to accept the idea that some might in fact be centrists? In my opinion, there are many supporters of both CPC and LPC who are centrists. Arguably, most Canadians are centrists. Ignatieff, who supported the US invasion of Iraq and who condemned Chretien for his cuts to military spending, does not qualify as a leftist by most Canadians' definitions. I hope your comment that Liberal, NDP and Green supporters believe that all "...Tories are inherently evil..." is mere hyperbole. Tories aren't the problem. It's Harper. No matter how hard he pretends to be a centrist, he can't convince Canadians that his core beliefs have changed. In the past, you acknowledged that Harper was a social conservative even though he hasn't governed as one. Harper's history is general knowledge though some of his past flirtations with the lunatic fringe are not. I don't expect that the mainstream media will ever report this story: http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Fron...2/11/02902.html

Apparently CPC strategy is not to fire her but wait for the issue to be forgotten given the short attention span of the media.

So what criteria would operationally define a conservative in your opinion? On the Ignatieff thread, you stated: "I'd rather be ruled by the whores at a typical Nevada brothel than the faculty at Harvard." Is this one of the defining criteria?

Stephen Harper is simply Stockwell Day with better skills at not speaking about his beliefs. "Harper consistently plays down his evangelical loyalties in largely secular Canada and has avoided questions about it." Source: http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun...-end-times.aspx

Harper an intellectual? Some might argue otherwise given that his beliefs more closely parallel those of Sarah Palin: http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun...-end-times.aspx

While I'm disappointed that Ignatieff supported the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, it differed from Harper's actions. Harper actually went on US television and condemned the government of Canada for not invading Iraq. Ignatieff supported the US invasion but readily acknowledged that "...Chretien acted in the interest of the Canadian people..." by not joining the Anglo-American invasion. Stupid Harper even told Fox News that a majority of Canadians outside of Quebec supported the invasion.

So other than his out of control spending on Quebec, do you think he has behaved like a fiscal conservative?

Not everyone views being pro-Israel as middle ground. Some have described it as being right-wing.

Do you think that Harper's out of control spending since he took power is restricted solely to Quebec and that otherwise he has behaved as a fiscal conservative?

And your statement reveals that you could not detect sarcasm if your life depended on it. Harper a Communist?

Here's an excerpt from the fifth commandment. Perhaps it will answer your question. " ...for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents..." Benevolent? Sounds more like he's in need of medication or other therapy.

Do you know what USSR stands for and what the USSR's agenda was with respect to homosexuals?

Yes, it's remarkably reminiscent not only of communism but even Stalinism. After Stalin came to power, he enacted not only anti-gay laws mandating up to five years of hard labour in prison for homosexuality, he also strictly prohibited abortion. After Stalin died in 1953, he was replaced by Khrushchev who liberalized laws prohibiting abortion but the anti-gay laws remained. So as you say, what's happening in Canada is eerily similar in that we now have a Prime Minister who not only opposes abortion but as recently as December, 2006, publicly attempted in parliament to remove a basic right from gays and lesbians under the benign guise of "revisiting" the issue. With a majority, we'd be on the slippery slope to Stalinism. Communism rears its ugly head in Canada. Stephen Harper must go NOW. :angry:

Then you're living in the wrong society. Perhaps you'd feel more comfortable in Saudi Arabia. No more fear of being subjected to hand holding lesbians or bacon eating or other crimes from the Old Testament. Just yesterday I went into my local supermarket and was stunned to see pig products in the cooler compartment. Canada reeks of sin and even Stephen Harper can't stop it! At least not until he gets a majority...

It is not especially difficult to delve into Ignatieff's past and discover some of his ideas. For example, in his 2005 book The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror, he acknowledges that he accepts limitations on civil rights in the fight against terrorism...a position at odds with some in the Liberal Party. He's written about 20 books, including many award-winning ones, and hundreds of lengthy articles in academic and other journals. He has been very prolific in the New York Review of Books: http://www.nybooks.com/authors/13 His pro-military writings are numerous and his condemnation of previous Liberal leaders for their cuts to military spending are a matter of public record. His position on Iraq has not been forgotten. While I think Bob Rae as leader would have recaptured some of the NDP vote and Ignatieff will scare off some left-leaning Liberals, ultimately Ignatieff should appeal to the centrist majority including those who parked their votes with CPC until Dion was pushed out. Harper's ideas are also a matter of public record. For example, it does not take much of a search to discover Harper's article "Now is the time for social conservatives to move forward, not retrench" in a 2002 issue of Alberta Report. His appearance on US television in 2003 condemning the government of Canada for failing to invade Iraq has not been forgotten. At the time, Harper claimed to Fox News that a majority of Canadians outside of Quebec supported the invasion.

I think you are equating Christianity with regimented, dogmatic religiosity. I suspect that Muslims who are regular mosque goers are more socially conservative as are Sikhs who are regular temple goers and Jews who attend synagogues regularly. Harper appeals to social conservatives of many religions, not just Christians. Those who believe that Canada in the twenty-first century has something of value to learn from what was written thousands of years ago by primitive, malodorous, tent-dwelling, Bronze Age Middle Eastern men whose life span was less than 30 years are probably more socially conservative than those who do not. There is a political party for Christians who actually are social conservatives and have no use for a hypocrite like Harper who opposes same sex marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research yet governs as though he does not. It's called the Christian Heritage Party (CHP). Here's how CHP and CPC differ: http://www.chp.ca/en/policy_comparison.html