Dave_ON

Indeed, if many more CPC MP's are "booted" Conservatives may lose government by attrition. The house will be filled with independant former CPC MP's.

Why then did the last through the consecutive Chretien majorities? A Harper majority would like drive more to the BQ than away from it give his current popularity in the province.

I'm not so certain of that. They persisted through all of Chretien's consecutive majorities with no real issue.

Are you implying sir that Mr. Harris's Common Sense Revolution was neither common nor sensible? If so I'm both shocked and appalled. Interesting to note that many of the old Harris crew are currently entrenched on the federal level and it would seem our illustrious former provincial finance minister hasn't changed his ways in the least. I love overpaying for the 407, thank you Mr. Flaherty. What to sell next... I’m certain the ceremonial mace of parliament would fetch a decent price.

So basically you want them to do more with less? The millitary is already under funded and under equiped to do what you want them to do, how will cutting their budget further achieve the goals you've set for them? There are far less important items where funding could be cut. The LPC did enough funding cuts to last us for many years to come.

Thanks Michael, I didn't realize it worked out to less then .5% of a cut. Thanks for the link.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/03/deficit-spending003.html So it's finally come down the CPC is going the deep cut route rather than raising taxes. This was likely the best possible move they could make given the choice between two evils. However, to me this all but signals there will be no election in the very near future. !.7 B is a notable amount and it's hard to imagine that health care won't be affected in some way. Not a popular decision but I'll be interested to see exactly they are planning on cutting in the near future. Honestly I'm not even sure where they'd begin at this point other than the gun registry of course.

Lol I just had a chance to watch this video, it's too hilarious.

Canadian colours are Red and white. However, as I mentioned regardless as to who did what when, I think it's time we stopped with the tax payer funded advertizing for the current party in power. Let's depoliticize all government communications.

Thank you I accept your acquiescence.

Given the current state of things I wouldn't at all be surprised if it did. The question remains will Mr. Harper call it at the end of legislated 4 year duration or push it to the constitutional 5 year limit?

No being arrogant and pontificating about it makes it superior and self righteous.

Nor did I accuse you of that. I was referring to what politicians do to get elected. You really can't resist sniping can you? So your solution to the dishonesty of politicians is what precisely? I'm looking for practical solutions, not altruistic notions.

We could just respond to it in much the same way Bush did to the softwood lumber dispute. Ignore it.

Who's making excuses? The examples I cited are excellent examples of what you want. You'll hear a lot of jabs towards Joe Clark and Dionne because it's fashionable to do so and is almost a part of our culture. However, many do admit that they were "decent" or "earnest" and often "too nice". Why is it we say this about these people, don't vote for them and then turn around and bemoan the lack of integrity in politics? Truth is nice (read honest) guys really do finish last in politics. I didn't make the rules; I'm just pointing them out to you. If you think this is a problem that can be solved in any real practical way, well I'm all ears. I never said I preferred anything, per usual you are forming opinions on unfounded assumptions and reading in subtext where none exist. Truth is politicians have to make difficult and unpopular decisions; decisions that people don't like, but nevertheless have to be made. Would Harper have been elected if he said he was going to tax income trusts? Or if he said he was going to contiue the Afghan mission? No, further perception is reality. You may think you can turn Ottawa upside down when you're sitting in opposition but when you're in government you realize things are quite that simple. Whether obfuscating the truth is right or wrong is quite immaterial, the fact remains it happens and why? Well because as I've said the nice honest politians aren't particularly successful. If open and complete honesty were the recipe for success in politics we wouldn't be having this discussion would we?

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/29/ethics-cheques.html So the Ethics chief ruled that the prop cheques (checks for our American readers) that had the CPC logo on them were "inappropriate". And the award for stating the obvious goes to... "Mary Dawson". Cheap and shameless CPC self promoting plugs paid for by the generous tax payers of Canada notwithstanding I think it's high time we had legislation implemented that depoliticized all government communications. Now of course the CPC aren't the only ones to ever do it, but if they're so concerned about the good use of tax payer's money surely they'd be on board with this type of legislation. If I receive another mailing on "Canada's Economic Action Plan" with Mr. Harper's face plastered all over it I'll likely throw up. If it's our action plan why not have a picture of the Canadian flag, the peace tower, or some guys repaving a highway? Alberta and Ontario already have such legislation in place on a provincial level why not make the federal level also?

Come now there's no need to wax sarcastic... Your flippant aspersions aside, please try and remain accurate in your assessments. Pointing out reality doesn't make one apathetic, it makes one observant. By contrast, denying the reality of situation does not make one a concerned and caring citizen, it makes one oblivious. To be quite honest with you I would love to run, save that my current MP in my riding is doing a great job. I seriously have a great deal of respect for him. Glen Pearson, he's a member of the LPC but is reasonable and very involved in the community. He also called for the rest of the LPC and other opposition members to ease up on the whole Guergis/Jaffer attack. That aside if he weren't in the picture my pragmatism not my cynicism would prevent me from running, at least at this current moment. Unfortunately running for office is a very expensive undertaking and generally involves a great deal of personal financial investment. Sadly I don't have that kind of capital at this time. The rest has to be raised, some assistance from you party but the lion's share from the community. Then again if Elsie Wayne could do it why not me right? (Consequently she is the only politician that I can think of that has been honest and successful at the same time, she did after all comprise precisely half of the PC caucus back in the 90's) Who said it was considered a weakness? Now you're just bloviating. What was said by me and many others on here is that it's not the reality of politics nor is it expected. You say it was Clark's and Dions policies that were the issue. You're half right, but the difference is they ran on them and were upfront about very unpopular policies that they deemed necessary. It got them nothing. So my question to you is why do you expect to get blood from a stone? It seems to me that it's far easier than getting complete open honest discourse from a politician.

The major issue with the whole gay marriage debate is that it shouldn't have been a debate to begin with. What we have is an institution that as far as the state is concerned is purely a legal matter. As with all things legal, morality and by proxy religion, should never really enter into the equation. Religion has no place in civil law in a secular society. For the record, being gay myself, I would never choose to get married in a church. Nor would 99% of the other gays I know. Not to mention the fact that there are more than enough gay friendly churches out there that are more than willing to perform these ceremonies if the couple feels the need to have a religious wedding. What is the proper term for folks from Ontario? Ontarioans doesn't roll off the tongue. Ontarians? Ontarioites? Ontariogonians?

Yes but a higher percentage of folks in Alberta voted for the the conservatives then did people in Ontario. Check the regional breakdowns of any poll and you'll find that CPC's support is strongest in Alberta and the rest of the west to a lesser degree. Same as the LPC gernerally derives the bulk of it's support from Ontario and the Atlantic Provinces.

No the phrase you're searching for is pragmatic cynicism. Apathy is defined as not caring. I care a great deal and I'm practical about politics, those who tell the truth don't get elected. It didn't work for Dion with the green shift(tax) it didn't work for Clark and a myriad of other idealists with good intentions. If you're so worried about honesty in politics why not run yourself? Put your money where your mouth is.

The problem with idealists like you is you expect that a cat can somehow become a dog if it tries hard enough. To expect honesty from politicians is frankly unrealistic. The best we can truly hope for is that they do as little damage as possible from our specific point of view. If you expect honesty from politicians you will always be disappointed, why? The honest/nice/principled ones don't get elected and more often than not don't even bother to run.

On this point I'm starting to wonder actually. The CPC hasn't really recovered the numbers they had prior to the furor surrounding December prorogation. I would have thought they would have been back up to their 10 point lead they were enjoying in late fall of 09 by now. The CPC may not be going down steadily but they certainly aren't moving up any time soon either. This poll only shows us that we haven't really moved anywhere for well over 4 months now.

Hrm... I believe the alledged grass roots support of the CPC is over stated. Does the CPC have so much support because they listen to the grass roots or because they’re not the LPC? Look at their main bastion of support, Alberta. Is this because they have such amazing fiscal policies that Alberta is so very much more prosperous thanks to the seemingly inexhaustible and sage wisdom of the party? My postulation is that in fact it is because they do not have the word Liberal, (read Trudeau), in their name and that it was formed from a party that once upon a time resembled a grass roots movement; how far the CPC has fallen from the reform days. This is just another way that the CPC is trying to fix the system to their advantage. It's no different than the epic gerrymandering of the LPC. They'll ultimately attempt to tool the system so that the only the funding methods they employ are admissible. If the CPC is so amazing they should have been able to convince the majority of Canadians that they can do the best job of running the country, they should not have to resort to attempting to bankrupt the competition. I believe the new CPC motto should be “If you can’t beat them, bankrupt them.” As I've said many times in many threads and TB pointed out earlier. When did "We're no worse than the other guy" become something that one should be proud of?

It's funny but those who screamed the loudest about Anne Coulter's right to free speech have been conspicuously absent on Mr. Galloway's dilema. Seems only certain loud mouths are afforded that right...

This is probably the largest issue facing the BLOC at this juncture. It is also highly likely that in the absence of a suitable replacement many of the members would drift over to the NDP and a few to the LPC. It never ceases to amaze me how the BLOC always seems to come back, do in no small part to Mr. Duceppe's leadership and ability to campaign effectively. He's actually managed to garner the respect of many English speaking Canadians; while they may not agree with his Quebec first philosophy, I think many people secretly wish they had a leader that was looking out for their interests as much as Mr. Duceppe does for Quebec.