socialist

The status updates have been a great addition to this excellent forum. Keep up the good work!

Albertans who voted NDP were suckered into making a terrible mistake at the ballot box. They can now watch helplessly as the NDP destroys Alberta’s economy, balloons its debt, and sets its and Canada’s development back 100 years. Alberta has admirers of Hugo Chavez running the province. What will Quebec do without Alberta supporting their glorious social programs?

Many hidden regressive agendas and habits keep leaking out of the Orange Crush Plan, that if we are not astute and careful could crush Canada. These NDP people are anti-wealth for the citizens’ – so they can control us. Totalitarian Authoritarians.

Well, the Liberals I talk to have more in common with the CPC than the NDP. What makes you assume all Liberals are for a coalition with the NDP? I don't live in a socialist cocoon anymore. I'm out there talking to people. I think it is you who is naive.

The biggest news is how the public sector pension has a shortfall of 7 Billion dollars. This is the same story pretty much everywhere there is a public sector union and their pension. We are on the hook for this. This is why Wynne wants her ORPP. To pillage it for her union buddies.

Justin had no choice. All was decided for him. The timing, the taking of the money, everything was set in stone. Poor Justin could not help himself but to take that $20,000 from the Canadian Mental Health Association. Poor, poor Justin, stuffing that money into his own private pockets instead of leaving it to help out the real mentally ill. But Justin thinks things should be done 'from the heart outwards'. Yup, from the heart outwards.

It's the educationists who push this stuff, and the sad thing is that many teachers will go along with it not realizing the future ramifications.

I am against the flipped classroom. How many kids will consistently go home after school and watch videos on numerous subjects. This will make someone a ,ot of dough and then it will fizzle. 99% of educational research is bogus.

Not sure how the Liberal carbon tax (i.e. A tax on everything) is considered moving to the 'middle' of the political spectrum. To me it seems as far left as possible, because it gives the government the ability to tax and control everything, including the air we breathe.

I don't know what you think a PM does all day, but I am realistic enough to understand that a PM, any PM, will not occupy himself with solving the problem of a senator's greed. A PM, any PM, has much more important things to do and think about. That's why PM Harper instructed his CoS to make sure Duffy would pay back his greed.

It worked wonderfully in 2011.

These are the facts: PM Harper WAS fully aware, after the media had reported on it, that Duffy had claimed expenses he had not actually incurred. PM Harper did not know and neither did anyone else, including Wright (we still do NOT know now) if Duffy could claim those housing expenses under the rules, as vague as those rules are. But because some vague rules say that the expenses COULD be claimed does not mean they necessarily SHOULD be claimed. All that PM Harper could go on is to state unequivocally that claiming expenses which were not incurred is wrong and therefore he told Duffy that he had to pay back that greed. Fact: the PM then instructed Wright to deal with the issue. Fact: Prime Ministers, any PM, does not manage his own office in a micro style. They cannot because other duties and much bigger files keep any PM fully occupied, and therefore a CoS is hired to micro manage the PMO. Fact:Wright knew that Harper wanted Duffy to pay back those expenses which were not actually incurred. Wright had conversations with the PM on the effect that would have on other potential expenses claimed by senators, etc. Fact: Wright has always said, and testified under oath, that he never told the PM about his personal payment to help Duffy AND the government out of a bind. Fact: the audit was never tempered with. An attempt is not the same as an actual interference of an audit. Fact: the sponsorship program was a systematic program running for years. During those years, Paul Martin was finance minister and was full aware of the budget item called 'sponsorship program' Fact: A systematic program which was uncovered to be of a corrupt nature (sponsorship scandal), is something completely different than one instance of a CoS deciding to repay the tax payer with his personal money, for a senator's GREED. Spin it all you like, Justin. You can eat out of Baynes slimy hands as much as you crave fake scandals. You are even free to consider Duffy as your latest hero. Eat your heart out! Staff working at the PMO at the time, did not reveal the source of the payment because Wright has requested to keep that payment confidential. Then the lies started in order to try and keep that personal payment confidential. Did Wright and others create a huge mess? Absolutely. Were they (excluding Duffy) engaged in corruption? Not so if you believe that Chretien could get away with lying about abolishing the GST! That, too, was a lie, a complete lie. A lie to vault hmself into the PM chair where he then sat for many years after.. You think Chretien's lie about scrapping the GST was NOT known by his most closest of advisers? You seriously think Chretien did not include others in his lie to scrap the GST???? I have read the emails, or most of them at least, and they are the facts. Did you read them? What, exactly, within my comment do you not agree with? Please do tell. That decision to pay the $90,000 from either the party or, as it turns out, from Wright personally, is what came first. All the rest follows as a result of a request by Wright to keep his payment confidential. Follow the emails. The first action by the PMO was all about how to repay the money to the tax payers. Then all the rest comes later. All Wright had asked Duffy to shut up about was where the actual payment came from. Duffy was flip flopping all the time, read the emails, read them. Did you read the three emails in which Duffy clearly indicates he feels he should in fact repay the expenses? And did you read the other emails in between in which Duffy explains why he should not pay back the expenses? Duffy, too, did not have a clue as to what rules should apply and what not. He acted as if he sometimes agreed with claiming his non incurred expenses, when he was most greedy of mind, I suppose, and sometimes he let loose in his correspondence that he himself should pay back those very same expenses. It is a tempest in a teapot. You should follow the sequence of events as how they happened in real time.

Harper has never, ever said he fired Wright. The media says Harper has said it, but Harper has actually never ever said it. You should learn to distinguish about what is paraphrased in an article, and what is directly quoted as to what the PM actually said. I will challenge you to find me one shred of evidence in which you can find a direct quote in which the PM says he 'fired' Wright. You will not be able to find one because there is none. Period.

Naomi Klein disagrees with you. You want us to bow down to the agenda because you've been hoodwinked yourself; except you aren't aware.

You miss the point utterly, and completely. Did you not hear when Wright testified under oath that he has never been sure, that in fact he still is not sure that Duffy's housing expense claims were illegitimate. Wright did know though that Duffy was greedy in abundance and that is what Wright based his decisions on. You are sounding more and more like a robot who does not deal with humans on a daily basis. Have you never been in a situation where the issues are complicated, where loyalty plays an important role and where crystal balls are not available. In your robotic world, crystal balls are always telling you what comes next. Life is that easy for you, right? Right.

I was asking about how much the Liberal party had paid for Mac Harb BEFORE Justin washed his hands of the senate.

Wright said that he had no indication either way if Duffy's housing expenses were legit, OR NOT. That is what you don't want to hear. Wright has said that he did not know either way.

The eleven week campaign is a good thing. Since all parties have a lot to talk about and since this is a neck on neck race, it bodes well for democracy to have a long campaign period in which all various parties visions for the country can be laid out. I also think it's a good thing that the consortium debates may not happen after all. Those debates were a joke, since one minute per candidate to speak on one topic or another is simply not valuable enough to be taken seriously. A real debate should be had and is needed for a well working democracy and I hope that the new debate formats will give us that. Looking forward to it. And all parties had the opportunity to fundraise. All parties had the chance to raise as much money as the CPC managed to raise. It is not an unfair advantage the CPC has over the other parties; the CPC simply raised more funds because more people donated to that party. So enough of the sour grapes.

You're new here, but let me tell you something: When one opinion writer or another finds it necessary to give us his or her unfounded opinions about Harper, it does not mean there is any proof for such unfounded opinions. And the fact that you simply repeat such unfounded opinions of Harper, does NOT make it true. It only means that you are repeating unfounded opinions.

Party politics is a necessary aspect of our system. It would simply be impossible to govern with more than 170 independent MP's seeking solutions. Also, the first past the post system insures that party politics must resonate within the constituencies and that the constituencies,as such, are mini elections between the political parties; those parties with the most input from the entire country are most likely to gain the most seats. And that's how it should be. MP's have input. They attend caucus meetings and can voice an opinion at every opportunity. If being an independent MP was all that desirable, then surely more people would run as independents come election time because more Canadians would vote for them. But Canadians do not favour independent candidates for the most part and the reason for that is obvious.

The carbon reduction target setting is not just about how to price those carbons. If you listen carefully to NDP Linda McQuaig and also Tom Mulcair, they both say, in a muddy way, that the meeting of targets is the first priority. Tom has clearly said that Oilsands development must go hand in hand with being environmentally safe. But Tom will not mention how high he is willing to set the carbon reduction targets once he would be in power. He may very well set those targets so high that the oilsands can never ever operate under such targets. Meeting carbon reduction targets is Mulcair's number one priority. He says that. But he does NOT say what his targets will be if he is to win power.