Visionseeker

Question: How does one define "wrecking the country"? Answer: Record unemployment and massive deficits. The Conservatives have played the centrist governance game haphazardly and under duress. Canadians are not comforted by such amateurism.

How one defines conservatism today is admittedly difficult to do with any degree of confidence. I would suggest that this is born from the loss of Communism as its traditional counterweight. This is not to say that only conservatives stood in opposition to "the red menace", but rather that much of its brand benefitted from a supposed dichotomy. The Conservative Party has been adapting to new realities, but such adaptations have been limited to what is needed to survive - not thrive. Conservatism is dying a slow death in this country and, for that matter, this continent because it has invited itself to be taken hostage by religious interests who insist on imposing a model of social conformism that is 50 years out of step with the times. Hardly a formula that can win young converts. Conservatives find themselves on the trailing end of the progressing spectrum of societal values. This, more than anything else, marks the party as antiquated.

Mark my words: There will be a fall election. The Conservatives will lose power. A Liberal majority has slim possibilities, but remains somewhat possible. Why? After fullfilling 4 of their five campaign promises from 2006, the Conservatives have governed as reluctant caretakers; eschewing much of their ideological leanings in favour of the easy road towards retaining power. Thus they have failed to promote their conservative substances whilst adopting a pseudo-liberal style of governance. In short, they come across as phony and, after 3 years at the helm, neglectful. The cupboard of accomplishments is not one to envy. How much the Liberals manage to exploit this will largely determine the depth of their victory. But I can't help but see the parralellels to the Diefenbaker-Pearson era and wonder if another minority government isn't somehow preordained. IMO, a BIG intangible influence will stem from the outcome of the health care debate in the States. If a robust public option appears, then I would wager that the right in all of North America will have lost a lot of credibility.

Zogby and Rasmussen! That's your evidence. Both houses are paid mercenaries who conduct push polls and are consistent outliers on any polling event where other houses participate. Rasmussen's latest gambit is to negate moderate approval and disapproval in favor of a strongly approve/disapprove measure. That's simply a recipe to highlight comparable wingnuttery. Truthers are absolutely the counterpoint of birthers. But truthers are not as prevalent as Zogby claimed (his results could not be replicated by any other firm) and, as far as I'm concerned, meeting an accusation that a political party is fast certifiable with the defense that your opponent "was proven to be kinda nuts once" doesn't speak well for your side.

Nonsense! People believe what they want to believe. And 58% of Republicans CHOOSE not to believe or continue to question the President’s legitimacy because their prejudice has them grasping for whatever plausible theory that fulfils their prejudice. It's quite stunning really. For it means that the GOP is quite simply uncompetitive in any quest for control over any of the three elected branches and that the USA is set to be a one party state for the foreseeable future.

No, they use Research 2000, not "Diageo/Hotline". Nevertheless, R2K is quite reputable and the response from the polling community was initially skeptical... Until they started doing their own polls on the matter. Check out PPP's results due tomorrow or Tuesday. They'll more than confirm R2K.

So the snake charmer brings his boa to the service... I don't think so. When attending a funeral service for someone who's faith you know little about, your ignorance can carry you only so far. When you're the PM (with complete access to protocol officers), you're not carried an inch.

Sorry, August is busy trying to figure out how he managed to talk out of the wrong orifice.

1- It is not a false story. But one that remains ambiguous. Editors modify stories all the time and, in this case, they seem to have a senior Catholic cleric quotred who hasn't demanded a retraction or apology. Disciplined why? The apology doesn't retract the quotes attributed to the senior Catholic cleric, it simply ignores them. You're right. And it will be equally interesting to see what role this may have played in Kory jumping ship. Why would they? They know that someone has stepped in it, the story can only grow from there. No, the bigger story is why the Irving empire may have had to perform a human sacrifice in order to be cleansed so that they might remain eligible for ship building contracts.

OK. Now I "know" what happened. The PM took his protocol advice and briefing from someone like you. Not a church service but a funeral!? Good God man! What church service could be more sacrosanct than a funeral?

I imagine that Fife is in very big trouble right now.

Wow! Talk about slamming a square peg into a round hole!!! "Heart people", as you call them, are necessarily extremist who occupy the political fringe. As they are set in their ways, no amount of evidence can make them change their opinion. "Head people" are necessarily centrists as they are open to review their convictions based on the veracity of new evidence. Conservatives and NDP supporters are more likely to be "Hearters" while Liberals tend to use their heads more. Because that's what people in the centre do: think.

Argus!!! I think we've finally found something on which we actually agree. A man I've worked with for 12 plus years rarely took a day off sick (maybe 3 days over 12 years). But in October, a cancer diagnosis had him go full bore 30 days until long term kicked in. Meanwhile, I myself used all my 2008 and 2009 family related leave days (10), the equivalent of 7 vacation days taken as partial days off, and 12 sick days from April 2008 until May 2009 when I recorded 5 days of bereavement after my mother succumbed to cancer - a fight that I couldn't let her wage alone - hence all the leave taken. Now this study doesn't seem to address vacation entitlements, but even without those partial days off bringing mom to CT scans, ultrasounds and chimo sessions, that's 27 days in less than a year. Am I thankful that my employer and bargaining unit created a regime that made such leave possible? Absolutely! But does my taking such leave suggest that I'm some kind of sloth, absolutely not. My own anecdotal observations suggest that the federal public service is in a demographic pickle, a perfect sick leave storm as it were, where the number of employees with young families and those with older age concerns are exerting a disproportionate influence on workplace absenteeism.

Lets see what gets redacted It ain't going away because Harper flubbed. And instead of apologizing, he lied. Monty Python's a fitting metaphor for our PM: "It's just a wafer" [subject explodes]

Bitter, much?

CPP is not in the same boat as EI. It is not a tax, but an entitlement to all who contributed and reach a certain age. That makes it more of a lottery really.

It's not really insurance because, if it were, 1- premiums would be based on relative risk (i.e. the volatility of the field of work would affect the premiums paid) and 2- self employed people would be able to participate. EI is a tax under another name.

Exactly. What a... Nevermind.

LOL! Yup, them Liberals are so stupid that they'll make funding claims that won't later be supported by Elections Canada filings. [/sarcasm] I believe that like I believe that Harper consumed the Host.

It's not our response to inflation we should consider, but rather deflation. Baby boomers are now starting to retire in droves. This most selfish and spoiled of all age demographics tends to act in a manner that protects their economic expectations. Problems is, the suceeding generations do not have the productive means to economically float the money-for-nothing, freedom-fifty-five myth that the boomers lived by. Inflation will sleep deeply in an economy that will be marked by frequent pension failures and significantly devalued private investment portfolios. While the markets are currently in an up-swing, the economy is not. Things are about to get much, much worse.

Yes, Alberta politics has fascinated me for decades.

It's not a rumour. Did you catch her resignation speech? I've seen more coherence from a meth-head after a 7 day binge. She obviously had to resign for some scandalous reason; seems that reason doesn’t involve hiking, but rather an indictment focused on who built and paid for Casa Palin .

Hum, Palin. Get fork. You know the rest.

It's been rough for many of you lately, as it has been for us above the 49th. But there are always reasons to celebrate for the citizens of the "second" best country in the world. So get to work and make this weekend one for the ages.

The lobbying restrictions are a big part of their recruitment woes. Another biggie is their propensity to throw staffers to the wolves when difficulties are encountered. Defeatism runs quite deep from what I've witnessed. The growing sense that Quebec is lost and with it, any hopes of a majority has instilled a "I coulda been a contender" mentality: a sense that their best days are behind them. Parties in this psychological state have a tendency of self-destructing. The "Raitt-gate" episode could be seen as an example, but the best indication is the recent ad campaign against the Bloc in Quebec. The ad I listened to can only serve to inflame passions and improve Bloc support rather than bring Bloc supporters to the Conservative ranks. To the average Quebec federalist, the ads seem deliberately aimed to stoke the Bloc base as a way of blunting Liberal progress in the province. Such tactics are signs of retreat. Not the mark of a party confident about its prospects. While the attack ad is aggressive, it comes across as a defensive move and, in Quebec, defensive politics tends to lead to disasters at the polls. Don't believe me? Just ask Mario Dumont.