Ignatieff calls an election?

[Mr.Canada]

You guys have to get rid of Harper right?

Ignatieff is going to call for an election every time he gets a chance right?

Ok so when is the writ getting dropped Tory bashers?

Oh that's right the Tories sit at 40% in the polls and would gain a majority if an election were held today...lol.

Ignatieff makes the entire left wing look stupid.

He's an embarrassment to you communists out there.

[Michael Hardner]

Mr. Canada

Ignatieff makes the entire left wing look stupid.

For the record, what are the differences between his policies in Harper if any ?

Certainly not enough to pin 'wings' on either of them.

[Michael Hardner]

For that matter, here's a quiz on the 'ultra leftist' Mr. Layton ?

How did he propose handling corporations in his 2008 election policy ?

a ) Nationalize them

b ) Sell them and give the money to the poor

c ) Have the government seize them, but allow private ownership of a minority of shares.

d ) A 22.2% tax rate, which is lower than all but the lowest (under $50K) corporate tax rates in the USA.

You know what the answer is.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Michael Hardner

[Alta4ever]

For that matter, here's a quiz on the 'ultra leftist' Mr. Layton ?

How did he propose handling corporations in his 2008 election policy ?

a ) Nationalize them

b ) Sell them and give the money to the poor

c ) Have the government seize them, but allow private ownership of a minority of shares.

d ) A 22.2% tax rate, which is lower than all but the lowest (under $50K) corporate tax rates in the USA.

You know what the answer is.

Does it matter every answer is the wrong answer.

[Michael Hardner]

Not d)

Platform by Platform 2008

NDP

...

* Restore uniform 22.21 percent corporate tax rate.

[Moonbox]

Not d)

Platform by Platform 2008

Yes D as well. There are many types of corporate taxes. They Americans may have higher corporate income taxes, but much of Canada has higher capital investment taxes. Ontario has one of the worst rates in the world.

A tax grab is a tax grab and any way you slice it it would drive business out of Canada.

[normanchateau]

Mr. Canada

For the record, what are the differences between his policies in Harper if any ?

Although Harper and Ignatieff both wanted to invade Iraq and although both wanted to continue our mission in Afghanistan, it was Harper who decided that we'd only remain in Afghanistan until 2011. Harper decided Canada would cut-and-run in 2011 even though many in our military would rather remain. Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

Those who view Harper as pro-military might want to read Hillier's new book.

[Keepitsimple]

Although Harper and Ignatieff both wanted to invade Iraq and although both wanted to continue our mission in Afghanistan, it was Harper who decided that we'd only remain in Afghanistan until 2011. Harper decided Canada would cut-and-run in 2011 even though many in our military would rather remain. Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

Those who view Harper as pro-military might want to read Hillier's new book.

So - as opposed to us changing our mission to focus on redevelopment and training - you disagree with Harper and you're in favour of continuing an active military approach on the front lines for our military past 2011? Have I got that right?

[Wild Bill]

Although Harper and Ignatieff both wanted to invade Iraq and although both wanted to continue our mission in Afghanistan, it was Harper who decided that we'd only remain in Afghanistan until 2011. Harper decided Canada would cut-and-run in 2011 even though many in our military would rather remain. Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

Those who view Harper as pro-military might want to read Hillier's new book.

Haven't had a peek at the book yet but there was a large article in the Post about it. Among other things it said that the General got along well with Harper and also McKay, the defence minister. His real problem was with the Prime Minister's Office staff!

As for respect, at least Harper has pumped SOME money into the military budget. You can argue about how much and how fast but compared to a decade of Liberal budgets it's quite an improvement. At least it wasn't Harper's government who initially sent our boys over to Afghanistan with Arctic camouflage and then didn't pay for something more suitable! They left our boys to either buy their own or spray paint what they had!

That was disgraceful!

[Mr.Canada]

Although Harper and Ignatieff both wanted to invade Iraq and although both wanted to continue our mission in Afghanistan, it was Harper who decided that we'd only remain in Afghanistan until 2011. Harper decided Canada would cut-and-run in 2011 even though many in our military would rather remain. Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

Those who view Harper as pro-military might want to read Hillier's new book.

Ok so now the left is pro war in Afghanistan? I'm puzzled. Wasn't it the left who wanted us out immediately? Now that 2011 is almost here you left want to stay? Please make up your mind left wing. Stop opposing ideas and policy for the sole reason they came from your PM. And you guys wonder why the left cannot win an election.

Ignatieffs lack of policy resembles Harpers because he doesn't have any of his own and copies w/e Harper does.

[fellowtraveller]

Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

He has an odd way of showing his disrespect, since the military budget has gone from about $14.4 billion in 2006 to over $19 billion in 2009.

I do admit that Harper is no Chretien when it comes to disrespect.

[normanchateau]

Ok so now the left is pro war in Afghanistan? I'm puzzled. Wasn't it the left who wanted us out immediately?

Yes, the left did want us out immediately. What's that got to do with Ignatieff? He certainly didn't want us out of Afghanistan.

Ignatieff has consistently supported the minority Conservative government's commitment to Canadian military activity in Afghanistan. When Harper called a vote in the House of Commons for May 17, 2006 on extending the Canadian Forces current deployment in Afghanistan, Ignatieff expressed his "unequivocal support for the troops in Afghanistan, for the mission, and also for the renewal of the mission."

When the vote was held, there were 102 Liberal MPs in the House of Commons. Among those MPs, 66 voted against extending the mission, 12 abstained and 24, including Ignatieff, voted with the Conservatives to extend the mission. Following the vote, Harper shook Ignatieff's hand.

How does Ignatieff's position with respect to extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan make him part of the "left"? If Ignatieff's position on Afghanistan is "left" of centre, what's the position of the right on Canadian involvement in Afghanistan?

[normanchateau]

He has an odd way of showing his disrespect, since the military budget has gone from about $14.4 billion in 2006 to over $19 billion in 2009.

In 2005, Paul Martin’s Liberal government announced the largest increase in the Canadian military budget since the Second World War: an increase of 12.8 billion dollars to be spread over 5 years. This of course accounts for a large part of the increase between 2006 and 2009. But it is not unprecedented for Harper or his fellow travellers to take credit for Liberal pro-military initiatives.

Do you seriously think that Ignatieff, who was entirely in favour of the invasion of Iraq while Chretien opposed it, is not pro-military?

[M.Dancer]

In 2005, Paul Martin’s Liberal government announced the largest increase in the Canadian military budget since the Second World War: an increase of 12.8 billion dollars to be spread over 5 years. This of course accounts for a large part of the increase between 2006 and 2009. But it is not unprecedented for Harper or his fellow travellers to take credit for Liberal pro-military initiatives.

Do you seriously think that Ignatieff, who was entirely in favour of the invasion of Iraq while Chretien opposed it, is not pro-military?

My biggest wage increas came in 1978..when I went from $4 and hour to $16.....

Given that the armed forced were cut to the bone in the previous 20 years, any increase would have been enormous

[Mr.Canada]

In 2005, Paul Martin’s Liberal government announced the largest increase in the Canadian military budget since the Second World War: an increase of 12.8 billion dollars to be spread over 5 years. This of course accounts for a large part of the increase between 2006 and 2009. But it is not unprecedented for Harper or his fellow travellers to take credit for Liberal pro-military initiatives.

Do you seriously think that Ignatieff, who was entirely in favour of the invasion of Iraq while Chretien opposed it, is not pro-military?

Martins increase came after harsh criticism of his cuts over the 10 years previous. Martin cut military spending from 1994-2005 then he increases it slightly and gets a pass? I don't think so. It was Martin and the rest of the Liberals who created the Armed forces mess in the first place. Nice try. I'm not sure if you were of voting age in 1995 so you may not remember.

[Mr.Canada]

Yes, the left did want us out immediately. What's that got to do with Ignatieff? He certainly didn't want us out of Afghanistan.

Ignatieff has consistently supported the minority Conservative government's commitment to Canadian military activity in Afghanistan. When Harper called a vote in the House of Commons for May 17, 2006 on extending the Canadian Forces current deployment in Afghanistan, Ignatieff expressed his "unequivocal support for the troops in Afghanistan, for the mission, and also for the renewal of the mission."

When the vote was held, there were 102 Liberal MPs in the House of Commons. Among those MPs, 66 voted against extending the mission, 12 abstained and 24, including Ignatieff, voted with the Conservatives to extend the mission. Following the vote, Harper shook Ignatieff's hand.

How does Ignatieff's position with respect to extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan make him part of the "left"? If Ignatieff's position on Afghanistan is "left" of centre, what's the position of the right on Canadian involvement in Afghanistan?

Ignatieff and his Liberals are a left wing party, the NDP is a far left wing party. Their ideals are very similar indeed.

Edited October 22, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[Michael Hardner]

Mr. Canada

the NDP is a far left wing party

Wrong.

Supporting a 22% corporate tax rate does not a far left wing party make.

Left wing parties would support nationalizing industry or somesuch...

[normanchateau]

Ignatieff and his Liberals are a left wing party

In what way are Ignatieff's military policies left wing?

[normanchateau]

Ignatieff and his Liberals are a left wing party, the NDP is a far left wing party. Their ideals are very similar indeed.

Let's look at Harper's ideals:

"As head of the National Citizens Coalition, Harper led a Supreme Court battle against gag laws that restrict third-party speech during election campaigns, but as prime minister, he hasn't done a thing about them. As opposition leader, Harper railed against Chretien's support of the Kyoto Protocol, but in government, Conservatives have conceded the need to do something about man-made global warming. Before becoming prime minister, Harper was a critic of the gun registry, but it is still in place. For most of his time as prime minister, Harper supported Canadian military involvement in Afghanistan only to then provide his own 2011 deadline to cut-and-run.

On a range of issues, Harper has flip-flopped from the right to the left.

When he ran for the Canadian Alliance leadership, he showed a willingness to work with pro-life members of caucus and reach out to pro-life voters. He spoke out against euthanasia and said he opposed embryonic stem cell research. During the 2004 English leaders' debate, Harper said if the Tories were elected, "My Conservative government will not be tabling any legislation impacting in any way a woman's right to choose." In the final days of the 2006 election campaign, during a stop in Quebec, Harper more brazenly answered reporters' questions about abortion: "The Conservative government won't be initiating or supporting abortion legislation and I'll use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote."

As leader of the NCC, he was a critic of human rights commissions, but last year, his government's Justice Department filed a report defending the HRCs.

Federal arts funding under the Conservatives is 20 per cent higher today than it was under Liberal Paul Martin.

Harper simply wants to be elected. If he thought being conservative would win him more votes, he'd move to the right. If polls consistently showed that 90 per cent of the public were solidly pro-life, Harper would be the first one to introduce a ban on abortion."

http://www.theinterim.com/2008/nov/03harpers.html

And then there are Harper's left wing fiscal policies long before there was a recession:

http://andrewcoyne.com/columns/2007/03/fla...ig-spenders.php

[fellowtraveller]

In 2005, Paul Martin’s Liberal government announced the largest increase in the Canadian military budget since the Second World War: an increase of 12.8 billion dollars to be spread over 5 years. This of course accounts for a large part of the increase between 2006 and 2009. But it is not unprecedented for Harper or his fellow travellers to take credit for Liberal pro-military initiatives.

Do you seriously think that Ignatieff, who was entirely in favour of the invasion of Iraq while Chretien opposed it, is not pro-military?

?? I was challenging the notion that Harper has in some way not supported the military, he has raised the budget and not cancelled previously approved intiatives, and he has resisted Martin, Dion and Layton in their wishes to cut and run..

Who cares what Ignatieff supports, he does not sign any cheques.

I remember you now Normie, you are so hardcore Liberal you make jdobbin look like Stockwell Day.

Next you'll be telling me the Liberals, especially Chretien, always loved the military......

[Shakeyhands]

why are all of you entertaining the troll?

[Keepitsimple]

Although Harper and Ignatieff both wanted to invade Iraq and although both wanted to continue our mission in Afghanistan, it was Harper who decided that we'd only remain in Afghanistan until 2011. Harper decided Canada would cut-and-run in 2011 even though many in our military would rather remain. Harper and Ignatieff do differ in policies. Harper has less respect for our Canadian troops.

Those who view Harper as pro-military might want to read Hillier's new book.

You still haven't answered the question. Does this mean that you disagree with Harper....that you want to extend our active engagement military policy beyond 2011?

[Wild Bill]

Left wing parties would support nationalizing industry or somesuch...

LIke auto or medical insurance, perhaps?

[Hydraboss]

LIke auto or medical insurance, perhaps?

...or perhaps increasing OAS and implementing mandatory pension insurance?

[Dave_ON]

Ok so now the left is pro war in Afghanistan? I'm puzzled. Wasn't it the left who wanted us out immediately? Now that 2011 is almost here you left want to stay? Please make up your mind left wing. Stop opposing ideas and policy for the sole reason they came from your PM. And you guys wonder why the left cannot win an election.

Ignatieffs lack of policy resembles Harpers because he doesn't have any of his own and copies w/e Harper does.

Supporting a particular party does not make one "left" or "right". Many Canadians, such as me support the least objectionable party; it's not so much that they like that party, just that they hate it less than the rest.

You're a Harper fan boy we get it, but supporting a particular party doesn't mean you support ALL of their policies. Well you do of course but that’s not the norm for most of us. There are a number of "right wing" policies that I support even though I voted "left wing" last election. People vote a particular way for a number of reasons, some for fiscal policies, some for social policies, some because they truly support a particular issue they campaigned on and some because it's the guy that's been in for 20 years and we don't particularly dislike him so why not keep him.

I personally can't stomach a CPC vote not because they are hypocritical, opportunistic and intrinsically corrupt; the same can be said for the LPC and the NDP. No I don't support them because my perception is they are too steeped in religious social conservatism and that's not the direction I want to chance them taking the country in.

Honestly there is little difference between the way the LPC and the CPC governs. Except that the CPC's will say they won't govern like the LPC then do so. At least the LPC never claims they'll not be true to their nature.