normanchateau

How do their values differ?

But ultimately it followed the US and the other 30 or so countries which recognized Kosovo rather than the rest of the world which did not, in part because they do not want to fuel secessionist movements elsewhere. Pauline Marois will be pleased.

If these cities called all the shots, they'd not be burdened with Stephen Harper as Prime Minister.

It'll be 50 years on March 31st.

And that's exactly what he did. Pauline Marois will be pleased.

It depends on how you define useless. He sure knows how to spend: http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

Conservative strategists take note. Keep Harper out of the ridings in the next election.

CPC majority? In the past 50 years, there have been only two Conservative majorities: Brian Mulroney in 1984 and Brian Mulroney in 1988. The NDP took 19% of the vote in 1984 and 20% in 1988 so yes, a strong NDP vote would help the Conservatives. But the NDP can't be blamed for Mulroney's win. Mulroney obtained more than 50% of the vote in Quebec in 1984 and 1988. Harper is now running third in Quebec behind Duceppe and even behind Dion. And if you think Mulroney's Quebec numbers were impressive, check out Mulroney's Ontario numbers. For CPC to win a Mulroney-like majority, they'll need a centrist leader, not a socially conservative, former President of the National Citizens Coalition who even Tom Flanagan could not disguise. Quebecois might like the billions Harper shovelled their way in the 2007 budget, a budget warmly endorsed by Gilles Duceppe, but a majority of Quebecois are not about to vote for a man with socially conservative positions and baggage. History is not on the side of a Conservative majority as long as that party remains saddled with Stephen Harper. More on the National Citizens Coalition: http://www.harperindex.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=0010

Here's another observation. The percentage of the by-election vote captured by the Conservatives increased substantially in the two western ridings relative to their percentage in the 2006 election. Harper did not campaign nor even show his face in those ridings. Coincidence?

In other words, the lowest personal income tax rate was 15% in 2005 before the Conservatives were elected. Bizarrely, the Conservatives increased this rate in 2006 then moved it back to 15% in 2007 so that they could claim that they reduced the lowest personal income tax rate. This is an accomplishment? They should be ashamed that they've not reduced personal income tax rates below what they were in 2005 but instead squandered a record surplus into the largest increase in program spending in the history of Canada in 2006 and 2007: http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

http://canadaonline.about.com/od/bills/p/mjreform.htm

Unless you count the Belinda Stronach-like MP for Vancouver Kingsway who wisely chose not to run in Vancouver Quadra, the riding in which he resides.

As one who lives and voted yesterday in Vancouver Quadra, here's my two cents worth. Quadra was a safe seat for Stephen Owen but is not a safe Liberal seat. When Stephen Owen ran for parliament the first time in 2000, there was only a 7% spread between him and the Canadian Alliance candidate. The combined Canadian Alliance/Progressive Conservative vote was greater than the Liberal vote in 2000. Similarly, the combined Reform/Progressive Conservative vote in Quadra was greater than the Liberal vote in both 1997 and 1993. Stephen Owen worked very hard for his constituents and many of us know him personally. Hence his increased percentage of the vote in 2004 and 2006. The Conservative vote in 2004, 2006 and even 2008 was actually far lower than the combined Canadian Alliance/Progressive Conservative votes or the combined Reform/Progressive Conservative votes. With the right leader, i.e., someone other than Stephen Harper, the Conservatives should be able to win this seat. In yesterday's by-election, with a very weak Liberal candidate, Joyce Murray, the Liberal vote declined by 13%, the Conservative vote rose by 6% and the Green vote increased by 8%. Joyce Murray was a provincial MLA who lost her seat in the last provincial election. I anticipate that the Conservatives will run a stronger candidate in the next federal election and the Liberals would be wise to do the same. Despite living in one of the wealthiest ridings in Canada, 64% of Quadra voters yesterday voted for parties to the left of the Conservatives.

Yes, he promotes some of them but on others, he takes a socially conservative position resembling the failed policies of George Bush. For example, while the Paul Martin government introduced a bill to decriminalize possession of small quantities of marijuana, Harper has now introduced legislation resulting in MANDATORY jail terms of six months for growing as little as a one marijuana plant and selling it. Harper has also promised not to reintroduce the Liberal legislation even though it results in potential jail time and permanent criminal records for young people possessing as little as one gram of marijuana. The NDP has advocated outright legalization but Harper finds even decriminalization totally unacceptable. Per capita, the US jails more people for drug-related crimes than any country in the world yet their drug problem remains far greater than Canada's. Why is Harper following the discredited Bush policies? And if he's following these policies now, how extreme would they be if he ever obtained a majority? How many Canadians share Harper's view, and that of his socon supporters, that jail time is an appropriate penalty for possession of a small quantity of marijuana? Those that do share his views of course don't find him scary.

And had Stephen Harper made the same innocuous comment, I suspect it too would have been met with indifference.

Thanks for the tip. I just looked again and found the insert. Our marginal tax rates are indeed now back to where they were in 2005.

And this is precisely why the Conservatives won't win a majority in the next election. The only Conservative to win a majority in Canada since 1958 was Brian Mulroney. Mulroney won a majority of the popular vote in Quebec and more importantly, was a centrist without an overt, socially conservative agenda. If the Conservatives hope to win a majority, they need to at least start thinking about Harper's replacement.

In my opinion, ADQ voters switching to the PQ because Stephane Dion said if Marois were responsible, she'd not hold a referendum, is also about as likely as a Harper majority. Does anyone seriously believe that whether Marois does or doesn't hold a referendum will be influenced by these specific Dion comments?

Has anyone looked at the Federal Tax Rates on Schedule 1 of the 2007 T1 form. For 2007, they were 15.5%, 22%, 26% and 29%. For 2006, they were 15.25%, 22%. 26% and 29%. For 2005, they were 15%, 22%, 26% and 29%. In other words, for two consecutive years now it appears that the socon-like Harper government has raised the marginal tax rate in a manner which would most affect those in the lowest tax bracket. Furthermore, they did so at exactly the same time that they had an extraordinary surplus and increased government spending to the highest level in Canada's history. Is this what Harper considers fiscal conservatism? Does Harper not realize that fiscally conservative economists advocate income tax cuts? Did Harper learn nothing from Preston Manning other than the importance of good grooming? Surprisingly, in October 2007, the Harper government announced and promised a personal income tax cut retroactive to Jan. 1, 2007, cutting the lowest marginal tax rate to 15 per cent from 15.5 per cent. This would at least have restored the lowest marginal rate to where it was under the Liberals. I wonder why the reduction from 15.5% to 15% is not reflected on the 2007 T1 form. Does anyone out there have a revised form indicating 15%? Is this incompetence or were the Conservatives merely lying once again as they had about income trusts?

Yes, I can see it now. Disaffected separatists who loathe Stephane Dion for the Clarity Act will now back the PQ because Dion stated that Marois, if she were responsible, should not rush to a referendum. This scenario is even less likely than a Harper majority.

Conservatives were right to condemn Martin for taking on Belinda. Except for Garth Turner, where was there outrage when Harper took on Emerson?

What did Harper mean on the tape when he referred to "financial considerations"? Why won't he explain what he meant?

I meant his words on the tape "admitting that individuals representing the Conservative Party of Canada were in last-ditch discussions to procure Mr. Cadman's pivotal vote at a critical time for a teetering Liberal government." That's a quote from the National Post asking Harper to put his words on the tape into an ethical and legal context rather than unleashing lawyers in an unsuccessful attempt to muzzle the opposition. http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=350818

There is also the fact that they've increased government spending to record levels. No Finance Minister in the history of Canada has spent more: http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

Eyeball, I've not been on this board for a while and can't recall if pointing out spelling errors is acceptable etiquette or merely considered a sophomoric insult designed to distract from the topic under discussion. Nonetheless, I am mildly amused if not "mystefied" at the audacity of someone who would make reference to an "iliterate" cretin while appearing not to know how to spell either "mystified" or "illiterate".