Cartman

Because I am a computer dolt and this is the best way I know how to reduce the length of links. Anyone can feel free to pm me how to do so otherwise.Do you think that there will further calls for Harper's ousting? Predictions? I don't think they can boot him before the next election can they?

Also, the Province of Alberta should not have to pay out more money to the feds. I still think that they should have reduced taxes for everyone who pays into them. This would reduce (not eliminate) the problem that FTA notes about who should get the money. Do you think people on welfare, AISH or EI should receive this $400.00 while the business owner also only gets $400.00 August? Don't you think the market should set energy prices?

http://tinyurl.com/dyfg9 Above is a link to the open letter according to Stephen Taylor. Here is the link to his site http://tinyurl.com/bz7ku

http://tinyurl.com/cxdr2 Considering the recent polls, the Quebec Conservatives upset with him, the number of CPC workers turfed over the summer, I would say there are significant problems in the CPC that cannot be so easily attributed to Liberal "media bias". I sure hope Harper is not given the boot.

Let us be crystal clear about this program. It is not a tax cut, it is handing out taxpayer’s money for rising energy prices. On this basis, the program will be yet another failure on Klein’s part. Why should every Albertan get $400.00 when this is supposed to compensate for rising energy prices? An individual who owns a small/medium business and must consume more energy will get back $400.00, while a couple with three babies will get back $2000.00. That is taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive. Returning taxpayer’s money is a great idea, but the way it is being returned smacks of political bribery and mismanagement. The first time he gave out rebate money, it went to anyone who filed their taxes. This meant some teenagers received taxpayer’s money even if they lived at home with their folks and had no power bill. Some teens were gleefully out spending their “hard earned” power rebates. Recognizing this error, the next time he decided to give the rebates to homeowners, but renters did not qualify even though they obviously consumed energy. When confronted with this error, he suggested that landlords pass on the rebates to renters. I doubt many did just that. So, what will "residency" mean this time? Who is the real slim shady Ralph? Instead of coming up with some screwball way of whimsically handing out taxpayer’s hard earned cash, how about doing what Tories always say they will do and cut taxes? How about reducing or eliminating health care premiums (which are taxes) or funding programs strapped for cash? He could have even created one-time only incentives to purchase fuel efficient cars or provide people with rebates to conserve energy in their homes. But, explain to me why individuals should get energy rebates in the first place if the free market is supposed to best decide the price of energy? Klein says we should have free markets and maintain a privatized energy sector. It is supposed to be part of the reason the province is booming even if energy prices do rise. It will be nice to get my $400.00 back, but I really hate being bribed with my own money and that is what this is. If he wanted to cut taxes, he should have cut taxes for individuals and businesses alike. Any Conservatives want to argue that taxes should not be cut?

I am not going to refute your statement because these sort of things are difficult to prove or disprove, but I could see Iran wanting to develop nuclear power. Currently, Tehran often gets so smoggy that people cannot even see and the city comes to a standstill. It is terrible. On the other hand, if I had the Americans next door and was worried they wanted to attack, I would probably want these weapons too. Is it not simply a matter of time before all nations possess nuclear weapons? I would assume that it is going to be impossible for the US to invade every country that is supposedly thinking of getting them. The US might have been better off with the Soviet Union intact controlling their nukes rather than this cluster.

Well let us explore this hypothetical shall we? If I were so wealthy as to own any large corporation including a media outlet and I wanted to ensure that it contained a political bias, I would likely want it to work in my interests certainly not against them. Thus, given the option between party X that will tax me more and reduce my profits and party Y which will give the money back to me, I suspect that I would choose the latter. If there is a bias in the media, it likely is in favour of whatever party will support the interests of large corporations. Thus, either the Conservatives are not really the party that will cut taxes or there is no Liberal bias. I believe the latter is true. Could you explain to me why the owner of a large media outlet would hire people that work against the profit incentive of the owner? Asserting there is a Liberal bias in the media is equivalent to me purporting that there is a Conservative bias in the labour union movement. Also, I find it rather weak when Conservatives argue that the reason they are not in power is because of the big bad media. People are not that stupid as to passively accept media products. If I am wrong, what makes Conservative followers more able to resist this powerful temptation than others? Do Conservatives own some special goggles that allow only them to read between the lines? Telling Canadians they are stupid and brainwashed is not the best election strategy.

Only 10 responses thus far. Any other takers?

Burns, this is the kind of stuff that is really irritating. EVERYONE here knows that Argus is a conservative. Everyone. Debating this is just useless. From what I gather, he believes in lower taxes, less government etc. Just because he can be critical of right-wing politicians does not make him less of a conservative. Regardless of your political stripe you cannot blindly accept the actions or rhetoric of politicians in power. That is just dangerous. I started a thread asking people to identify 3 policies they dislike of the current political party they support. I critiqued the NDP and Layton specifically. Could you do the same? Is there anything you do not like about the Conservatives or Republicans? You can't just follow. I think it was called "Plain Bad Policies".

The link is broken now but I thought it said that Leger is part of Gallup.

Well, that is a good question and I do not have the answer to it. I suspect media outlets probably pay them for such polls when there is little real news to report. In terms of regional breakdowns, a small sample is not necessarily such a bad thing. It just raises the standard error, but most polls have such small regional samples. As there is greater support in BC and Alberta, I suspect they are measuring something other than error. They could have been deceitful and reduced the level of significance to keep the SE down though. By contrast, extremely large samples are problematic because everything becomes statistically significant. In any case, this poll does not mean the Liberals will win the next election. It just shows support is high probably because many people have a Gomery hangover and that opposition parties will have their work cut out for them.

Just to clarify, I identify myself as being on the left and I really don't care where people buy their cigarettes, food or stationary supplies. I also don't care what television they view. I am not greatly angered by Fox as it is rarely on my mind and not included in my satellite package.BTW, do you actually know the definition of "mantra"? I still maintain that there is no liberal bias in the media and more importantly, no reason to have one. Nobody has even bothered to try and refute this point. I am sure CNN would love to have their taxes reduced.

The title of this thread is not misleading. This survey documents a major increase in support for the Liberals particularly in BC and Alberta. Double digit increases are most worthy of being characterized as "surges". What would you call them, slight increases? As such, things have not remained the same but have changed considerably. Keep in mind that not too long ago, it appeared that the government might fall. But hey, anytime you want to spend hours generating a mutually agreed upon lexicon, I will contribute.The information from this survey is also not presented in a misleading fashion. They clearly indicate the percentages for each party and identify those who responded that they were undecided. What are you supposed to do with the undecided when you are making inferences about what they will do when they go to the polls? It would clearly be inappropriate to claim they will all vote for one party or another assuming they vote at all. If they do not vote, then they are not relevant anyways and the results are valid and reliable. Regardless, it appears as though the Liberals are in good shape and I am not sure why Harper is daring Martin to call an election. I am sure the Liberals would really love to go to the polls right now considering the scandals do not seem to be bothering Canadians (particularly Western Canadians) as much these days. For clarification, I support the NDP and the results do not exactly place them in a great position. Rather than complain about the sound methodology employed or how the results are interpreted, I accept that Layton has a lot of work to do. Don't blame the messenger.

It means that they do not believe the undecided will be differently distributed into any particular camp; no reason to believe that the undecided will all necessarily vote NDP, Liberal, Cons or BQ. It is possible, but unlikely that the undecided have any particular preference.

I thought that Martin was not very bright, but he might just pull off a majority if he keeps this up. http://tinyurl.com/8ru5g

I figured that real Conservatives probably felt that way. Burns Burns Who here is a self identified neo-Marxist Burns? Or are you simply referring to someone as one? If it is the latter, then is this not rhetorical also? Since when is silencing opponents unique to the left?

I'll believe it when I see it.

I just keep envisioning Uncle Jimbo and Ned screaming "its coming right for us!"

Go look at the German elections thread.

They shoud be in Iraq.

I have not heard about this issue. It is strange that Calgary elects so many Liberals to council but none federally. Yeah, it is not easy to do a harsh self-critique.

I agree, but I would have to review Memoirs by Trudeau and My Life by Clinton.BTW, I liked Trudeau in many ways, but could anyone else on earth be more arrogant than him?

I think that the Liberals made the right decision here. In the end, it does not really hurt anyone, but helps many who want to be included in Canadian society. I guess we should agree to disagree on this one. I like the idea of federal assistance for child care, but I have argued that the same dollars might have gone further to help more people. I agree that too many people were excluded and wonder why this is the case. I don't mind if we "lead" on this issue to an extent, but implementation seems to be ineffective so far. Cars create an incredible amount of pollution and we need to introduce (not necessarily sustain) rebates on purchases of fuel efficient vehicles. If auto manufacturers are willing to create the vehicles at great expense, then they should be rewarded by at least breaking even on these social investments. Ha! The NDP used to be the loudest party against immigration and they caved too. I have nothing against immigrants (from any nation BTW). I think by far the most come here with the best of intentions and the best of realizations. But I have yet to hear an argument why we should sustain the current level given freer markets emerging. I can see instances where we have a moral obligation to accept refugees (when we support wars that generate refugees), but a society can only handle so much change in my opinion. The development of our culture is important.

Is the book actually out yet? If so, anybody read it?