RT_1984

Lost in Manitoba: "Harper will not ever be the Prime Minister of Canada. Leader of the Opposition is all he will ever achieve in this this lifetime." - Wow, what a bold statement. If Harper is so mediocre, then how did he ever become entrusted with Canada's second largest political party in the first place. Or how did he lead the NCC constantly dealing with the media. I guess they chose him because there was nobody else around and he was just so mediocre and drab. What an absolute bunch of BS. Look at George W. Bush - became President of the US. Not exactly the most articulate and charismatic person on the face of the earth now is he. And no one cares about such things as good ol superficial America. I hope the doubters and underestimators are proven wrong.

Springer is absolutely right. I am so sick to DEATH of people saying we need a fresh face with no baggage. Harper has little baggage on the baggage scale from 1-10. Sure a comment here or there, but nothing more than anyone else (although lefties would nothing better than to convince people otherwise). He's billingual,a policy expert, has both a pc and alliance background. And seems to be the only one that can possibly distinguish the new party from the Paul Martin Liberals. We will not win on tax cuts alone. Social conservatism to a degree will have to be used. Face it, its one of the main reasons for the success of Reform in the first place. Manning knew the right degree to use as does Harper. Unfortunately, Stockwell Day didn't and it damaged our chances. Now under a new banner we'll have shed the alliance name. Perceptions are everything. People keep saying (and i'm seriously sick of this) that we need a party in the center. That's where Martin is. Why invent the wheel. Has Canadian politics been reduced to partisan bigotry. Besides, the center is only what the public decides it is. Most of the public are not ideological like we on this forum are. Do any of these idiot lefties really believe that people gave Mike Harris, two consecutive majority governments because they thought he was a right-wing, extremist, thug, chainsaw mike etc. Or Ralph Klein 3 terms. Give me a damn break. That's just the leftwing trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, and unfortunately people on this forum are willing to condescend and play their game. I for one, will not. What we want is a distinct, two party system like the dems and the republicans in the US. Harper is the only one to do this. Others either lack the skills, qualifications, or vision. No, he isn't Pierre Trudeau. Neither is Martin. But he could be Mackenzie King. Extremely patient and increasingly shrewd. Give the man some credit for the past two years after the Day debacle. No, he didn't manage to convince the rest of Canada to drop the PC's and adopt the Alliance, but that's only because of the visionless partisanship of the East, which will be remedied by the new party merger. Traditional Tory ridings in Atlantic Canada will remain tory any. These people don't care who the leader is (except for Mulroney of course but he was a special case), these people supported a washed up party of Joe Clark for God's sake. And PC organizers have the balls, to whine about Harper. Completely unqualified, absolute hollow partisanship which I would like nothing better than to see destroyed in this merger controversy.

I was wondering what everyone thought of the new defense minister David Pratt. Pratt has been a vocal critic of past defense policy and was actually a proponent of Canadian participation in the Iraq war. The National Post was quite positive about his appointment. Given Martin's recent funding increasing for the military while all other areas are frozen, what does this say for our new PM. Given recently that Martin is giving tax cuts, while freezing spending and canceling Chretien legacy projects, how will the new Conservative Party distinguish itself from the Liberals. Especially with someone like Bernard Lord.

Moderate Centrist: I never liked that name anyway. Too meek. But anyway, I think people are reacting emotionally and irrationally when they advocate torture as well. Just like much of the irrational anti-americanism which is vomited up by morons who would do anything but give an ounce of credit to the stewards of global capitalism. No, they're not perfect. But no country is. And if you want to see arrogance, go to Europe. Germany has often been regarded as arrogant and they're people also. Ever read anything on the tour de France and what Lance had to do when he first raced there? Italians are the best in the world but can't even win a damn championship because of their egos in a team situation. And I'm not even going to go into the history of European foreign policy. So if the people want to praise the EU and China for what they are definitely not then go ahead. But you'd better burn your history books too. Bottom line: if it wasn't for the US in WW2, we might be speaking German by now. If it wasn't for them in the Cold War we might be speaking Russian. And you and others can go on with all the anti-American crap you want, but its really just eurocentric jealousy, and it makes me sick. All countries have greedy people. Move on. Because we all know that when it comes down to a choice between Bush and Hussein, or the Republicans and the People's Republic, we're gonna choose the Red white and blue. And if anything happens to Canada, we won't be screaming to France for help. Now I know what you're gonna say. I just commented on the death penalty. But this is the underlying theme to so many conversations on this board. Global capitalism, vs. welfare liberalism, social democracy, and socialism. Its all the same. Bottom line: the countries with the highest standard of living and those with the least regulated economies and the same is seen provincially within Canada: Alberta, Ontario, BC with Newfoundland and PEI at the bottom. Long live global capitalism. I hope it swallows this whole country and world as it seems to be doing through globalization. And you know what? There's not a damn thing Naomi Klein can do about it.

The more competitive this race is, the better. Most of Lord's credentials are fueled by the media. Anyone Tory holding office is not different than a central Canadian Liberals. Look at the economics of the place. You don't get elected unless you're a champion of welfare, EI, Equalization etc. And Lord is no different. He may have made a few incremental changes but would do no more for Canada than Paul Martin. We must remember that people in the Maratimes generally vote for mostly partisan reasons. More so than the rest of the country. Lord has been a Tory since he was a boy. Big deal. Harper is a real conservative: fiscally. And he will be better able to balance the party rather than alienate either half. In the end, this is supposed to be all about ideas. NOt about just winning.

I think Saddam should be hung. The world is better off without him. He doesn't deserve 3 meals a day and a bed to sleep in. He deserves justice and the Iraqis deserve restitution. For those who will no doubt condemn me for injecting my right-wing socially conservative and relativist morals into justice then they should look in the mirror first. These same people never ever hesitate to inject their relativist morals into the economic matters of a market economy. What a bunch of blind hypocrits. The bottom line is that restitution is a part of society and it always will be. Humans are moral beings and we will always have morals. I don't think Saddam should be rehabilitated and nor do I think Ed Gein, Ted Bundy, Paul Bernardo, & company should either. I believe there is such a thing as true evil. It is clear, naked, intentional, prejudice and very specific. Sociologists will always come up with new theories to serve their politics (which they promote quite blatantly despite claiming to be unbias and objective). Let justice be done. There's nothing wrong with that.

I was wondering what people think should be done with Hussein after the debriefing. Some of the main options include: Iraqis trial under Iraqis law, US trial or international tribunal. And also, what sentence would you give him?

Anderson must fall in the next election. For the good of the country.

Harper doesn't have any significant baggage compared to MacKay. Prentice isn't qualified and could be the next Mulroney for all we know. He's never held office and is a good businessman. That sounds eerily familiar. He's also not as billingual as Harper. Harper is a fresh face. He's been leader for less than two years is only in his mid-forties, fluently billingual, has the support of most former Harris organisers, and will "accommodate" social conservatives. I am not a social conservative but I'm not stupid enough to think that the success of Reform and its core support and founding didn't have a strong element of that. almost 70% of Canadians are in favor of some restriction on abortion, while recently a new poll shows 71% of Canadians are against legalizing same-sex marriage while 1/3 would support using the nothwithstanding clause. Harper will also cream everyone in the debate with his expertise and broad knowledge. He will pick the best of social conservatism to attract Canadians and leave the rest with Mr. Day. That's what he's up to and its working. Given the statistics above, its absolutely insane that a major political party wouldn't take at least some advantage of that kind of atmosphere. Again, the CBC and lefty Canadian media doesn't have a monopoly on Canadian opinion. Look how far CA has come in ten years with our dismal press coverage. The unite Right, will give us more come election time and they will be forced to reckon with us. As Harper as previously said that if this party is all about tax cuts then it runs the risk of being indistinguishable from the Paul Martin Liberals in the next election. One thing is for sure: I really can't wait for the party when it does eventually take power, to privatize that entire bloody CBC. It has never reflected Canada and it never will. To think I pay for shows I don't watch like "Undercurrents" and "Made in Canada" gives me the creeps. Imagine the amount of government funded NGO's and outside political organizations and left-wing causes that would be systematically cut off from the purse strings if an concise Harper government got in which truly had broad intentions. In conclusion, Prentice, MacKay & company, are revisionist incrementalists. Harper is a revolutionary and would be the next Thatcher. Since I am not a partisan bigot, I would seriously consider joining the Liberals or an NGO if Prentice or another directionless leader were elected.

Harper is not a fanatic. Prentice is no different than a liberal. Tax cuts won't cut it against Martin. Period. We aren't going to win many city ridings anyway so lets win as many rural ones as we can. This doesn't be theocracy but Harper would be the right mix. Prentice says there will be a place for socons but he has never elaborated. Furthermore, a prominent Calgarian who never went Reform/Alliance after 1993 should be viewed with scepticism. (except for Brian Pallister of course)

It's a shame that Brison defected since he could have joined Keith Martin, Rahim Jaffer and other social moderates in the party. Brison had a lot of great ideas about how to stem wasteful regional subisidies in Atlantic Canada which was a refreshing change for that area of the country. Unfortunately as Mark Milke predicted, he will now have to learn to "bleat like the rest of the lambs" in the antidemocratic, elitist Liberal party. I usually deplore heedless partisanship, but in this case it will punish Brison when he gets kicked out. He probably took the risk in exchange for a junior cabinet position in time for Martin's cabinet announcement on Friday. I always disliked Brison's contradictory, conditional and hypocritical approach to the merger. His stance was that he would never serve under a party led by a former CA MP (since he knows MacKay is toast in a leadership and Prentice is unknown that amounts to saying: "choose me as leader or I'm leaving the party.") I think that you should be either helping to construct this new merged party or get out where you belong. We have our differences but we should settle them in private. MacKay and Prentice know this. He was also very unhelpful during the Larry Spencer debacle (he was more critical than the Liberals and Paul Martin) rather than trying to diffuse the situation in a more concilatory tone like MacKay and Prentice. In the end, I think this is a purification process where the political realignment is the key, in the face of a cynical public who can't see any significance differene between the parties (and would go with Martin because he's a good brandname). Brison and lefties like Clark never ever belonged and were only members because of blatant, substanceless partisanship which is the true source of cyncism for Canadian politics which must be reduced. Reducing partisanship was one of the main themes of reform and now we are coming full circle. The PC's are now realizing that the reform market fundamentalism echoed by the Thatcher/Reagan Revolution in the future for conservativism, and now preach it in every successful provincial government. Now we need a federal party that does the same. Mulroney Keynesians and Stanfield/Diefenbaker organic conservatism (social democracy) is already taken and is not our goal. Long live the Alliance. Harper is the one option for true change in a revolutionary way rather than watered back incrementalist self-proclaimed conservatives. Because in the end, I simply cannot find any compelling reasons to campaign for the CPC in the next election touting anyone like Prentice or MacKay is being significantly different and better than Paul Martin.

An interesting CTV poll done today: If you were to vote today, which party would you pick: Liberals 28 % Canadian Alliance 7 % Progressive Conservatives 6 % Conservative Party of Canada 48 % New Democratic Party 10 % Bloc Quebecois 1 %

I think that Harper will win (and I will be ardently supporting him). He'll be able to hold a coalition of fiscal and social conservatives and moderates together the best. He's also a real strategic thinker and will use each side to maximize electoral gain as opposed to his own personal beliefs and that of some MP's. Following his history as a Reform MP, and NCC President, I think he's also the most conservative of the lot and the one capable of distinguishing the party from the Paul Martin Liberals who (whether we agree with) are seen as fiscally conservative, careful and responsible). Therefore we must in addition to electoral reform and fiscal issues find a cautious but distinct way of setting ourselves apart. We will not win votes in impovershed rural ridings by promising tax cuts. Therefore, an emphasis on Harper-careful social conservatism is needed in these areas. One of the reasons why people complain about parties are they think they're all the same. Shouldn't this say something. I also predict that we'll get about 100 seats in the next election, form a stronger opposition with more resources, and support and have a great chance at forming government in 2008. But for confidence, and strategic purposes we should always be striving to win in the present.

If Williams creates public auto insurance then he is a fool (highly probably - since he only got one MHA from Labrador and didn't even give him a cabinet seat). They must severely limit claims and introduce no-fault insurance. If anyone has studied the N.L economy and the Atlantic Canadian government in general then it should be obvious that much less govt. intervention is needed, not more.

The riding of Victoria B.C. (the Orchardist stronghold in BC, voted every delegate in favor of the merger). Orchard's own sister lost her delegate nomination in Saskatchewan). The time has come.