mar

I was mistaken. You're the first one I've seen on here so it took me a sec to realize you're just another troll screaming "look at me!" Why don't you go on back to the breast cancer survivors support forum and tell them they're all gonna die. You know that always makes you feel real powerful. done with you.

naaaww. No apology necessary. I know you're a good guy. I'm probably a bit testy myself, what with the danger of the sun not rising on January 24 and all

Well on the economy the Liberals have presided over one of the strongest growth and income periods in Canadian history so that's not gamble. As to the values. yeah, all parties pander to just about anyone in an election. Bet there's a lot of PO'd Christian Right supporters right now over Harper's promise not to reopen abortion and several other things.

You just in a bad mood or somethin? I mean you really, really don't strike me as a guy into that "angry white male' schtick. I think you know I can discuss your assertions but I really don't think you're serious (cept for the politician one - first, let's kill all the lawyers).

You DO realize this is spin? All Harper and he are saying is that the out-of-date and incomplete budget that they gave him produces the results he stated. There is NOTHING in this about additional promises. I'm gonna try this with my bank. Hey! give me a loan. My credit score was 8.5 in August. Course since then I lost my job and promised to pay a loan shark a million dollars but I got my August credit rating report right here and Equifax stands behind it 100% as being an accurate representation of some point in the past.

So emigrate. We'll never be able to create the paradise you crave ... we're just not smart enough for you So what you're saying is you're willing to settle for Mussolini instead of the real thing? That about it? This is precisely the kind of thing that makes many Canadians hate the Conservative Party when they stop to think about it. God I wish they'd buy you a TV spot and run it in saturation.

I can loan you a set of dice if you like, but they're blue. Let me know. Canadian troops deserve better than the present government (I'm ex-militia reserve read:short timer). You want to endanger troops? Keep doing what we're doing. Send them into actives without bullets or body vests for peacekeeping. They are just expected to what?...use harsh language? I'll gamble. My kids are worth it. I agree with you entirely on the underfunding, ill defined mission and general dropping of excrement on the CAF by all governments, pretty much since the '50's (and I'm another short timer, tho not reserve). To be honest, what I have heard outta the Conservatives is a lot of lip service, little concrete policy and nothing to make me believe they will not shortchange the CAF in the budget when push comes to shove but several things to make me believe they will involve us in more missions we are ill equipped to handle. I have come to accept that Canadians like the idea of a military and love to wave the flag now and then but as a budgetary priority its somewhere below translation of all government publications into Babylonian. I actually find the "my kids are worth it" comment made by you and another poster the most disturbing as it is in the long term I see the most danger in the present brand of Conservative Party. I did not feel this way about Mulrooney - tho I never voted for him - or Joe Clark. Since it has become popular for Conservative posters to say that a term or two out of office would do the Liberals good, I'll turn it around. If the Harper conservatives were to fail this time, perhaps by the next election more moderate people would gain a strong voice in the party and they would dump the imported Christian Right and NeoCon values and be ready to govern a country as diverse as Canada. This election has been lip service to being more moderate so clearly they recognize the problem.

At the risk of one more hi-jack, you seem to confuse consitutional democracy with mob rule. Under your definition, if 51% of Canadians decided it was a good idea to round up all gays and execute them, it would be ok with you if the RCMP set about doing it. The entire premise of a constitutional democracy is that the constitution sets out the basic values and ideals of a nation. These ideals may not always be met, but they represent something we strive towards. The U.S. consitution declared all men are created equal. Many of the men signing that document owned slaves and none of them thought women were equal. In the ensuing 200+ years the U.S. has fallen short of this ideal many times but they have also had periods where they advanced towards it and you could glimpse that promise. If we are a nation then we have global national values like equality that we strive towards. Otherwise we're just a bunch of selfish bastards who happen to occupy the same geographical area.

Every plan the U.S. has ever had involves using Canada as the wall that must be broken dowm to enter the fortress. A little history. During the Cuban Missile Crisis the U.S. put their military on high alert and asked canada to do the same; in fact expected it under NORAD. Then PM John Diefenbaker did NOT have the order issued. More than one person close to "The Chief" as well as several military analysts have suggested he didn't see a whole lot of value for us in missiles destined for Washington being detonated over Canadian airspace.

Where are those figures on the Liberal Warehouse daycare plan? Ontario's cost for the 25,000 daycare spots is presently costing Ontario taxpayers -$44,000 per spot. How much will 650,000 spots cost with the Liberals plan? Another gun registry? No,something even more expensive. So your solution is "scru the kids. I want a few bucks in some kind of rebate. Any kind."

I have a feeling a number of Canadians feel this way...that they'll roll the dice and see if the man they loathed two years ago has learned anything. Me, I'm not a gambler. I don't believe not saying something is the same as advocating a new position and I don't believe that a man who wanted to callously sacrifice the lives of Canadian troops to curry favour with a foreign leader in an invasion the majority of Canadians did not support is a man to be trusted. Ever.

Get out the guns and canned goods! The end of Canada is coming! I know I'm not going to be suprised when the Federal buildings start flying American flags with another star on them on January 24th!!! I better shoot myself in the foot tonight too, don't want to be drafted by the American Warmacht! The polls disagree with your Quebec=NDP statement, however leftist the Quebecois actually are. And about the axis: ax·is ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kss) n. pl. ax·es (ksz) 9. One of three or four imaginary lines used to define the faces of a crystal and the position of its atoms. So yes, it can bend four ways. Don't you know Bush is highly intelligent in the areas of the crystals and atomic science!!! Since you opened up this area, the elephant in the room that we have all ignored for a very long time is that we are the largest supplier of petroleum to the U.S. and history has shown they will stop at very little to secure oil. Now, as long as we go along with our current system of "take our oil, please" we likely have no problem but only a fool would underestimate just how crucial a complaisant Canadian government who will do their bidding is to the U.S.

Mostly due to increased debt service payments because of interest rates in the Mulroney times. Come on, if your going to go there, at least tell the whole story. Mulroney was also attempting to create an environment for the economy to recover after Trudeau trashed it. Chretien simply enjoyed this environment. Martin does deserve credit in his fiscal conservatism (and social conservatism at one time too) at the beginning of his time in the Finance office. Too bad he's so far away from that now. The problem is, geoffrey that you're arguing against a false cause. The fact (you can get the figures from the national accounts, StatsCan and other official sources) is that since 1994 the Lberal party reduced the deficit and cut taxes. Also in that time the real income of Canadians rose and the Liberals ran sa surplus. So when Conservatives make these dire predictions of increased Liberal government spending that we have to elect Conservatives to stop, you're arguing against something that has not happened in a succession of Liberal governments and there is no reason to suppose will happen if they are returned to power. So you're left with: "Well, we could do it better." Maybe, maybe not. Only one party has proved they can and when you start with making an unsubstantiated promise the Conference Board of Canada supports your budget (certianly implying your ENTIRE budget, not your budget proposals of six months ago) it is not a good start. Neither is throwing in compensation for GST losses to Quebec in the debates (which as we discussed would inevitably open the door to compensation issues for all provinces and territories).

We are already in deep debt, blame that one on the Liberal Messiah Trudeau. And Bush's deficiet is due to military spending in Iraq. Harper has said no Canadians will go to Iraq. The Conservative platform works, you'll find plenty of economists that endorse it. Actually the last of the big spenders was Mulrooney who added a great deal more to the deficit (you could look it up). I would think Rovik's general point was Bush deliberately chose to go into deficit for a war of choice. He wasn't arguing Harper would choose the same route, only the same result. Also that the economy took a nosedive under the republican administration as it might under the Conservative administration (after all virtually none of their members have ever governed anything other than several failed political parties). You'll find plenty of economists that support every platform and criticise every other. That says? I thought the point of this article was dishonesty. Mr. Darby seems a tad miffed he was punk'd, huh? ""Talk to Harper," he said. "It is not in the platform I received from them.""

You know, I'm getting little annoyed here. Yesterday it was Geoffrey telling me that Michael Ignatieff is a hypocrite, today you're telling me that David Frum has a hidden agenda .......... both of these accusations without providing any proof or explanation. So, what is David Frum's hidden agenda? Gee! I dunno. He left his home and native land to work for a Neo Conservative party in the United States, one that has repeatedly criticised the sitting government of Canada. c'mon. You can do better than this! At least pick someone who isn't drawing a paycheck from a foreign political party to try and claim neutrality. I would put together some Frum quotes but it might make me ill to read them and I don't have the time to clean the vomit off my keyboard.

Well in your two ridiculous examples, you draw the line at the criminal law. You seem to have no grasp of the purpose of a charter of rights. The point is not that the Charter explicity protects swingers clubs, it is that if these clubs are not in violation of the law (e.g. by being prostitution, underage sex, etc.), there are no consitutional grounds to suppress their right to operate. I doubt more than 1% (very generous estimate) of the population supports swingers clubs so they are an easy example but if you establish the precendent that rights can be stripped because we don't like them, you have threatened all of us. So the Canadian value is equality.... that all citizens have equal rights and protections and that IS a Canadian value to be proud of. To cherrypick rights that we don't like or that pertain to groups we feel are not important enough to protect reflects a complete lack of understanding of constitutional law. A country's commitment to equality is not judged on how well it protects the rights of the majority, but how well it protects the right of equaity for all its citizens, even the unpopular ones.

Oh I agree with you. Just like anyone else, members of First Nations have their infights, squabbles and power struggles. My point is neither that the endorsement is worthless or significant, simply that it is the endorsement of one lobby group and should be noted as such, not trumpeted as "First Nations en masse support Conservatives" which I think all of us find pretty unlikely.

I know I shold simply ignore this but I can't decide if the originator of this thread actually believes this or if its some kind of spam attempt to fill the board with ridiculous threads.

Economist says Tories gave him incomplete platform Updated Sun. Jan. 15 2006 4:28 PM ET Canadian Press OTTAWA — A prominent economist commissioned by the Conservatives to assess the financial soundness of their election platform says major items were omitted from the version he was given. Paul Darby, deputy chief economist of the Conference Board of Canada, originally concluded that Stephen Harper's Conservative platform "is affordable in each fiscal year from 2005-2006 through 2010-2011." The Conservative party promoted that conclusion last week as evidence its election platform had been "independently verified" by the Conference Board, an Ottawa-based think-tank. But Darby says the version of the platform he was given to vet didn't include a Conservative party health-care guarantee which states patients will be transported to another jurisdiction if they can't get timely care at home. It also omitted a Tory platform promise to redress the so-called "fiscal imbalance" between Ottawa and the provinces. Darby wouldn't comment on whether the timely health-care guarantee would bear a significant cost. "Talk to Harper," he said. "It is not in the platform I received from them."

yes. One of the things that I find intensely insulting to the Canadian population is the Conservative belief that the majority of us really won't let Conservative policies on relatively small minorities like First Nations peoples or the GLT community influence our vote. This calculation is expressed in Conservative statements regarding the the things you mention and in things like reopening same sex marriage in parliament. In both cases they are counting on voters being too self absorbed to care if minority rights are assaulted. Or to put it more simply: "If I ain't gay or Mohawk, what do I care." Certainly in my case it makes zero difference to my personal life if they reverse the SCC on same sex marriage as I don't plan to exercise that particular right. However, I DO believe our Charter is weakened and our commitment to equality compromised if we reverse the SCC so it IS a major factor for me.

The AFN is not merely the most prominent it is the offical elected body. The AFN passed a resolution in 2002 that stated among other things that: "...the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples or other “aboriginal organizations” are not viewed nor accepted by the vast majority of off reserve First Nations citizens as speaking on their behalf nor of protecting their interests..." You can see the complete text here. http://www.afn.ca/article.asp?id=1436

Lapierre seems to agree with Harper on this. NO. What he said is ANY votes in Quebec for a party other than the Bloc are good in that they draw votes away from the separatist cause, which seems pretty obvious. Stephen Harper claimed votes for the Liberals would actually INCREASE votes for the Bloc. This would require Quebecois who did not intend to vote Bloc either knowing or gambling on how many people were going to vote Liberal and then voting in greater numbers to counteract this, a rather tortured scenario at best.

The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples is, basically, a self proclaimed advocacy group not unlike the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. A lot of their prominence stems from governments at various times choosing to convey legitimacy on them by involving them in various processes. Some tribal leaders have criticized tham as having no legitimacy and feel governments have sometimes chosen to use them to claim support for policies not supported by the far more influential "Assembly of First Nations" the undisputed voice of First Nations peoples in Canada. The Assembly of First Nations has no official ties with the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. Basically the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples is a political lobby group with undefined support. First Nations Canadians being as pragmatic as the rest of us, they are quite happy to accept any good that comes out of them. All political parties responded to the only recognized power, the Assembly of First Nations, when they requested answers to 7 questions deemed key to First Nations voters.

LMAO We have a winner for best humour post of the day! Wait til the next big drop in oil prices tho, you'll be able to pick up those kids for $15.

At the risk of appearing closed minded, I am not real interested in the opinions of the child of a former Canadian media elite who now whores for the U.S. Republican party. Look up "hidden agenda" in the dictionary and you find a picture of david frum. I have an update to this however. yesterday Stephen Harper announced with great pomp that their proposed child car benefit would go to all Canadian parents even - gasp - gay parents. DUH. ANY person who fits the definition of a parent - principally meaning they are entitled to claim a or more dependent children on their income tax return would automatically receve any child care benefit. This is the kind of self serving thing politicians do - trying to make the obvious sound like some sort of gesture on their part - and is neither surprising or unusual. However, CTV Newsnet reported this as: "Stephen harper is moving more towards the centre" in reporting this "announcement." The only way this could be a move to the centre is if CTV thought his previous policy would have been to break federal law and go against Charter rights to deny a particular minority a universal benefit. And this was not presented as editorial comment, but news. This just in: In a sweeping move to move to the centre, Stephen Harper announced a bold ploicy for gays. "If elected," Mr. Harper said, "we will pay ALL gay and lesbian Canadians OAS benefits AND CPP benefits if they are over 65 and meet the normal qualification requirements. In addition, gays will be entitled to receive this is in addition to the 1% drop in GST we have alreaduy promised the gay and lesbian community." Get onboard the love train, y'all, brought to you by ConservaTiVe.ca News Staff