noahbody

Earlier Dion had mentioned coalition would be looking at a North American cap and trade agreement. Today, Duceppe mentioned part of the agreement was respecting Kyoto? Does this mean we are also going to be taking billions out of the economy to buy credits from foreign countries to please the Bloc?

Between our new PM and his NDP cabinet ministers who'll accidentally send intelligence to Bin Laden, we should be in fine shape.

I was going to suggest the Blefties, but yours is much better.

But the Conservatives

There is also the possibility that the GG will want to defer to the Queen. This could save her marriage.

That would be the public agreement.

Further to Dancer's reply, do you think it's better to have a stimulus at the consumer level, which benefits the consumer, dealer and the manufacturer or a plan that gives money directly to the top? Also, if billions had been given to the auto industry a year ago, what do you think would have changed?

So what you're saying is that it's a stimulus for the auto industry. And that's not needed.

She's likely more concerned about her marriage.

That's because the left attracts emotional people. And anger is an emotion.

So, the reason the government must fall is because Harper hasn't done anything to stimulate the economy, yet the coalition is planning on keeping Harper's corporate tax cuts?

Funny, it didn't make their website. Since they're running advertising on how unethical it is to make a deal with the Bloc, it seems highly unlikely. I don't think anyone here would say it's fine to appoint them to the Senate.

The biggest winners in all of this are Duceppe and the Bloc party. Some has called it a deal with the Devil. I agree. There is outrage that the Bloc will have power and influence for 18 months. But there isn't a light at the end of the tunnel. Duceppe will have gotten more for Quebec than any federalist MP could ever have dreamt. Support for the Bloc will remain strong. Liberal Governments as we know them will be effectively finished as the Liberals have effectively killed their chances of getting a majority for many years by strengthening the Bloc and legitimizing the NDP. To Duceppe, this scenario just might be more favourable than separation.

I was drinking hot coffee when I heard of the coalition. I'll be suing McDonalds.

I don't really believe Harper is a natural bully. He has played the role believing it is the best/only way to get his policy through. From my point of view, Harper believes in accomplishment over anything else. Would he want to be PM if he couldn't accomplish anything? I highly doubt it. As I said I think he's a terrible politician, but that said he has characteristics of a strong leader (of a country not a party). He isn't opposed to doing the unpopular (i.e. income trusts) for what he believes is the right move for the country. He's also a very rational, which in a time of economic uncertainty is a good thing. The other party leaders (except Duceppe) are driven by emotion. It's a little like kyoto. We joined up out of emotion because everyone else was doing it. Today, the world pretty much agrees it was a flawed solution. Still if Dion had been in office instead of Harper we would have been writing cheques totaling a sum between 10 and 20 billion dollars. Now we're going to be writing a cheque for 30 billion because other countries are doing it.

Since Quebec would be losing billions in equalization, it just might be them crawling.

Harper is a good policy man, but a lousy politician.

As I said in another post, it is similar to the facebook tactic the Liberals used, which I'm sure you'll agree was dishonest. The Tories are far from perfect in this regard as well.

Conservatives for Change is just a brand name. They were supporting Obama, not sabotaging his campaign. Here's their ad. http://www.adweek.com/aw/creative/ad-of-th...eativeId=269882 It's similar to the facebook tactic where Liberal staffers positioned themselves as upset voters.

Conservativesforchange.com was registered by the ad agency Deutsch inc. in L.A. It's a pro Obama group. Somehow I doubt they're involved. Likely the same Liberal staffers who were behind the vote for anyone but harper sites. That's my guess.

Why? Is fundraising really that difficult? Except for maybe Quebec.

Given the date, I assume it had something to do with corruption and scandal.

His comment was based on the need to maintain a large surplus. This is money that isn't working for the economy. As far as keeping industries from collapsing, I think it depends on the industry. Many believe the big three would be in better shape if they went into chapter 11 for the short-term.

Yes, it is all Harper's fault. He alone is responsible for the mortgage crisis in the US. Of course, the Liberals would never do anything untrustworthy.

So in a difficult economy, you believe decreasing the spending power of consumers by overtaxation is a good thing?