normanchateau

All those Alberta donors must be middle class.

And what political party do you suppose the wealthy are donating to?

And here's another prediction based on the squeaky wheel principle. I predict that Harper will soon apologize to Ukrainian-Canadians. I base that on: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/...gy.html?ref=rss "On Friday the federal government also offered $10 million to the Ukrainian-Canadian Foundation to support initiatives marking the First World War internment of Ukrainians and people from other eastern European ethnic communities in Canada." Ukrainian-Canadians first tried to get a financial settlement from Prime Minister Mulroney but he was not willing to give them money: http://ukrhistory.tripod.com/doc-056.html

What political party do you suppose the wealthy are donating to ?

“We’ve got a born-again prime minister,” trumpets David Mainse, the founder of Canada’s premier Christian talk show, 100 Huntley Street. They see him as an image-savvy evangelical who has been careful to keep his signals to them under the media radar, but they have no doubt his convictions run deep—so deep that only after he wins a majority will he dare translate the true colours of his faith into policies that could remake the fabric of the nation. If they’re right, it remains unclear whether those convictions would turn government into a kinder, gentler guarantor of social justice for all or transform the country into a stern, narrow-minded theocracy. And what would his evangelical worldview mean for international relations? From Stephen Harper and the Theocons: http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/200...the-theocons/2/

Sure his father-in-law tried to ruin his reputation but Elections Canada cleared him of only 21 of the 24 allegations. "Most of the allegations against Wilson were "unfounded or insufficiently substantiated," said elections commissioner William Corbett in a written statement dated June 27, but made public in the government newspaper Canada Gazette on Saturday. However, the review found Wilson violated the Federal Elections Act on three occasions." See: http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...89-3f1308dc4682 Wilson took the June 2008 decision by Elections Canada to mean that the Liberals, who booted him out in December, would take him back. However, LPC stood by their decision in light of the Elections Canada review. Poor decision on the part of Elizabeth May to welcome a MP booted out of his party for violating the Federal Elections Act.

Are you suggesting that how CPC has governed with a minority does not predict how they will govern as a majority? And if past behaviour does not predict future behaviour, what does?

There are reasons why religious nuts like Harper who believe that the bible is the literal truth choose not to come out of the closet. This article from the Vancouver Sun by religion editor Doug Todd answers your question: http://www.gregfelton.com/canpol/2007_08_2...%20article.html

I can think of many other reasons to ridicule Harper publicly but as long as the mainstream media continue to ignore these issues so will the public. If the media continue to ignore Harper's out-of-control spending and financial mismanagement why would they care that he wants jail time for a teenager caught with one marijuana plant?

Who do you suppose the wealthy are sending donations to?

Have you forgotten that Harper needs to change legislation to keep the Opposition on side? Remember Harper's 2006 Clean Air Act introduced by Rona Ambrose, and why Harper was forced to revise it?

But remember the squeaky wheel principle. The Germans aren't complaining. Sikh-Canadians are still complaining. While they got an apology, it wasn't in Ottawa and so there won't be financial compensation. I predict that they will get another apology, this time in Ottawa, after the 2008 election.

Harper Tories on the brink of majority, poll finds: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National "The Harper Conservatives will enter a federal election campaign with a polling lead that puts them within striking distance of winning a majority government, according to a new survey taken on the eve of an expected vote. According to the poll, conducted by the Strategic Counsel, 37 per cent of Canadians would opt to vote for the Tories were an election to be held today, compared with 29 per cent for the Liberals, 17 per cent for the NDP and 9 per cent for the Green Party. "

So you think that a former Liberal MP who was booted out of his party for unethical activities will make Liberal and NDP voters vote Green? They would have to be completely irrational and out of touch with reality. Sure, the riding will go Conservative but for entirely different reasons.

So do women. Unfortunately not enough women are elected prime minister or president to prove that they would defend the rights and dignity of their citizens.

From today's Vancouver Sun: With Prime Minister Stephen Harper trying to find an excuse to call an election before the "fixed" election date, it is a good time to revisit the words of Conservative MP Jay Hill during the debate on the bill to set those fixed dates: "If a prime minister went against the spirit of this legislation and purely called an election because he or she felt the opportunity was ripe, that the situation for his or her particular political party was very advantageous to go to the polls, I suspect that person would quite likely be punished by the Canadian people in the subsequent election campaign." We can only hope. Jean-Paul Faubert Vancouver

Is this not evidence of out-of-control spending? http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php Or this? "In a news release last Friday, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation accused Flaherty of going on "a spending binge." It noted Ottawa's June expenditures grew by 11.1 per cent. The federation recalled that, in the first three months of the fiscal year, program spending was up by 8.4 per cent. This, when the current budget is calling for annual spending growth of no more than 3.4 per cent. "Many Canadians were encouraged by the Conservatives' apparent new restraint shown in their third budget that limited spending growth," remarked John Williamson, federation director. "Well, so much for that. In the first three months, spending is instead up two-and-a-half times what these so-called fiscally responsible Conservatives in Ottawa budgeted it to be." Williamson says he no longer has confidence in the Harper government's pledge to limit spending growth to 3.4 per cent: "They've proven throughout their term in office that they can't stop themselves from spending." If history is anything to go by, he has a point. The Conservatives' 2006-07 budget pegged federal spending growth at 5.4 per cent. It came in at 7.5 per cent. The 2007-08 budget plan announced a 5.6-per-cent hike. It came in at 6.9 per cent." http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columni...c0-4fffb4e7e842

I suspect that your antipathy to the Liberals has more to do with this than the 1990's sponsorship scandal.

I don't think the Liberals will win this one. This riding used to be held by CPC MP John Reynolds. After Reynolds stepped down, CPC chose as their candidate for the 2006 election John Weston, an Evangelical Christian lawyer who posts many articles on the Christian Legal Fellowship website. Unlike Harper, Weston is transparent and candid about his fundamentalist religious views. That's why Blair Wilson won this wealthy riding in 2006. Unless CPC repeats their error, the Liberals will lose this one.

Now that we apparently agree on the operating principles, it shouldn't take us too much research to predict which group gets the next apology. One nice thing about a majority government, if we ever have one again, is that prime ministers won't feel compelled to apologize on behalf of all Canadians for injustices committed a century ago.

I think that's just one of the noble principles on which he operates. If Harper did not believe that greasing the squeaking wheel might yield votes, there'd be no apology. It was less than half a century ago that homosexuals received criminal sentences and jail time for engaging in homosexual behaviour. Sikh-Canadians were not being sent to jail for being Sikhs. If homosexuals became active on this issue and demanded an apology from Harper for this injustice, I doubt that he'd apologize. Harper doesn't expect to capture the gay vote so I don't anticipate that he'll grovel and pander to them.

From today's Vancouver Sun: With Prime Minister Stephen Harper trying to find an excuse to call an election before the "fixed" election date, it is a good time to revisit the words of Conservative MP Jay Hill during the debate on the bill to set those fixed dates: "If a prime minister went against the spirit of this legislation and purely called an election because he or she felt the opportunity was ripe, that the situation for his or her particular political party was very advantageous to go to the polls, I suspect that person would quite likely be punished by the Canadian people in the subsequent election campaign." We can only hope. Jean-Paul Faubert Vancouver

Not necessarily. Harper is on record as opposing embryonic stem cell research. Even John McCain supports embryonic stem cell research despite George Bush's opposition to it. As Obama pointed out, McCain and Bush agreed on legislation 90% of the time but disagreed on the remainder. Perhaps it's just a coincidence that Evangelicals like Harper and born-again Christians like Bush agree on this issue.

What's wrong with soft and sweet and girly?

I wonder if Preston Manning ever envisioned that his then finance critic, Stephen Harper, would create the largest increases in government spending in the history of Canada.