God

What an asshole!

Great Comment

"What an asshole!"

As long as we have psudo-neo-intellectuals making comments like this Stephen Harper will continue to rise in the polls.

All anyone has to do is scan a few of the comments on YouTube to clearly see that the overwhelming majority of viewers have a much more favourable opinion of Stephen Harper than they had before.

The super-scary 'hidden agenda' that they tried to plaster over him is washing off fast!

Harper is not a Hero.

I agree fully with G West. To me a vote for Harper is not a vote for Jesus Christ himself, as so many right wing Christians think. 64% of the Canadian population DID NOT VOTE FOR HARPER, he is not loved. The Liberals left a $60 billion dollar surplus and Harper pissed it all away. Most large companys in Canada are foriegn owned so that $60 billion went where? Canada's corporate tax rates are less than the USA all ready. Harper is now running this country on borrowed money, what an asshole. Countries run on tax revenues so canceling taxes and giving away surpluses will run this country into the ditch. Why are conservatives so blind, or is it just they are just plain blinded by greed. How about this, God gave the wealth of this country to us all equally. Harper could have ended child poverty with that $60 billion, and because he lets kids go to bed hungry, he's an asshole. 200,000 homeless in Canada, asshole, food banks, asshole, first nations kids that kill themselfs because this country has nothing to offer them asshole. Liberals also take part of the blame over the years, but Harper just had a $60 billion surplus, and he wants a little help from his friends, bite me! Asshole!
You know if Harper gets his way I'll have a gag order on me, just like that right winger Campbell wanted to gag the population in BC.
I don't dream of a christian police state.
PS: It was Harper's wifes idea for him to go sing, Harper is void of original ideas. I just love seeing the NDP and the Quebec seperatists getting what normal people "NEED" by pulling Harper's puppet strings, asshole on a rope, LOL.

Don't worry, be happy

Monday, October 5, 2009 - PARIS -

"Norway takes the number one spot in the annual United Nations human development index released Monday, while Canada ranks fourth in the list.

The top ten countries listed on the index are: Norway, Australia, Iceland, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, Switzerland and Japan.

The index compiled by the UN Development Program (UNDP) ranks 182 countries based on such criteria as life expectancy, literacy, school enrollment and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita."

During an interview yesterday one of the researchers was asked how Canada had slipped to #4. She said that Norway was top because of their wealth, otherwise Canada would be top. Norway's wealth comes from offshore-oil, so what we need now is to start drilling off-shore here, soon.

That hidden agenda

That's great. Stick to it - please. It's a winner!

Hmmm

That puts us behind the all but officially bankrupt Iceland and ahead of an Irish economy that's on life support.

Some crowd.

And Norway, would that be the same place that just elected a socialist government?

Off-shore might help

Maybe that's what's needed to get the NDP in power? Drill for oil, everyone becomes rich, then we can afford a socialist rejime.

"Oslo, Norway - Norwegians returned Jens Stoltenberg's center-left government to power. Norway has been buoyed by its oil wealth through the global recession – probably a decisive factor in the narrow victory for the three-party coalition that Prime Minister Stoltenberg leads.

During the elections in Norway the main dispute was basically about the effective utilization of the huge financial assets received from export of oil. The matter is that Norway has its own stocks of oil that allows it to take the third place in the world on the export of this product. As a result of a rise in prices of oil through the last years, the country managed to create a special "fund for descendants", which currently has a huge sum of $190 billion (approximately 41000 dollars for each citizen of the country). At the moment Norway is on the first place in the world on a standard of living."

Fool on the Hill - Good one! LOL!

I wish someone would have slammed down the cover on his hands while he was tickling the ivories!

They really do think we are sheeple!

Oil Wealth

A little quick research. Norway shares their oil and gas wealth with the population by law. They have about 4 mil people we have about 30 mil our population is 7.8 times as much as Norway, but our oil reserves are 18 times as much as Norway.
Big surprise is Norway owns thier oil companies and hires outsiders to extract the oil and gas. Our leaders should be taken out back and whipped for giving this countries wealth away.
Every school kid knows how to play Monopoly, never sell your assets, buy and own everything, the federal gov sold our national railway to the USA and BC sold its railway as well.
Harper is not as smart as a 5th grader!

By the way, Bob Watts

I believe it was actually an Iranian ex-pat who worked for the Norwegian oil ministry and worked out the deal on how to exploit Norway's oil riches and permit the Norwegian populace to benefit.

I'll post his particulars to verify.

Norway

Canada has more oil but Canadians don't benefit from our resources. To do so would mean we were socialists or something so its not on the agenda.

Child poverty on the other hand is something every Conservative is proud of.

One of his friends

CANADIAN PRESS

Last Updated: 6th October 2009

OTTAWA — Jim Flaherty is the finance minister of the year, according to an influential European economic magazine.

Euromoney magazine presented the award to the Canadian finance minister on Tuesday in Turkey.

Flats getting an award

So the captain of the Titanic gives an Ensign an award for seamanship. After hitting the iceberg.

Hubris knows no bounds.

You think the economy is on the rebound, in part thanks to Flaherty?

Talk to me next summer.

To: Dr. Alexander...

Mr. King, is that you?
Anyway a government can only be one thing, and thats a socialist Co-op. Eg: Running schools, police force, army, pave roads etc.
But now a days its about giving corporations tax breaks for donating out of date waste. Paying churchs to store the poor in hopes that the poor will find jesus, then the poor can shovel crap till they die, and be rewarded in the next life, I see Campbell is not waiting for his reward, LOL.

R/man

So Canwest says Harper is more popular because he "performed". It is that kind of insulting and moronic analysis that best explains why Canwest is in bankruptcy protection. Doesn't say much for the intelligence of the public if they believe such nonsense.

Bob Watts: No I am not Mr. King

I'm Dr Alexander

Lived in Norway for over six years. Moved back a few years ago. My standard of living dropped by moving back, but Tim Horton's didn't have a franchise in Oslo so my return was inevitable.

Norway is nice, but it's not perfect. No place is.

Uh, West

Your quote:

"In the speech to fellow Tories, Harper also describes how their party has kept leftists from being appointed to public institutions - including the courts."

What about Doer?

(Does that make three?)

Cheers

happy

My recollection is that the Doer appointment came AFTER the speech at the Sault...besides, Pee Wee has 'something' he wants from Jack right now anyway... a more attenuated 'grip' on the power he's coveted for so long...

realistically, Norway's sovereign wealth fund ...

... is 26 times larger than Alberta's :

http://www.swfinstitute.org/funds.php

Norway ~$400 billion : Alberta $12 billion. And Canada gets: rien.

Liquidating non-renewable natural capital (like bitumen and gas) without benefit to the owners (the public) is inconsistent with true Tory philosophy :

http://tinyurl.com/WitherAlberta

Mr. Minority needs more than friends

Rien? J' espere que vous jestez?

"Between 2000 and 2020, oil sands development has the potential to generate at least $123 billion in royalty and tax revenues for Canada’s federal and provincial governments."

http://www.oilsandsdevelopers.ca/index.php?s=royalties&x=12&y=6

That's TAR SANDS

Remember?

Bitumen is oil

Tar is modified resin produced primarily from the wood and roots of pine by destructive distillation under pyrolysis.

The word "tar" is often used to describe several distinct substances which are not actually tar.

Naturally occurring or crude bitumen is a sticky, tar-like form of petroleum.

It's a mistake many uninformed people make.

Tar vs. Oil

It may be that the "petroleum sands" of Alberta may be more semantically termed as "oil sands", however I think G West is just trying to reset the compass to the historical, and thus the more resonant and connecting term "tar sands".

I don't dispute the semantics realisticman. I still meet PC opposition when I use the term "sex" instead of the appropriately cleansed and, to me, scientifically and socially meaningless term of "gender".

But Hey! I'm old school.

Hey, Doc...

I appreciate that a certain poster does, quite frequently actually, require as much assistance as can be mustered. Nevertheless, your sanitizing of the incorrect euphemism with platitudes including 'more resonant' and 'connecting' may well ring true to those that chatter together in, as you say, old school hangouts but the correct term holds and any suggestion otherwise remains spurious. With all due respect sir, perhaps diligence towards those that make errors would be indicated rather than attempting to convince those that are right, that a wrong is even vaguely acceptable.

Old school used to signify correctness.

Bitumened and Feathered

My point is that an accurate and fully descriptive term is entirely appropriate. But not necessarily the best course to plot as the focus starts to become the term rather than the issue.

In trying to correct a historical descriptor, some problems can arise.

Renaming something that has already been branded, can lead to confusion as implicit with renaming is a kind of moving of the goalposts or re-framing of the argument. This usually does not work well and I can think of only a couple of examples of successful use of renaming for the purpose of reframing and that is changing "Global Warming" to "Climate Change" or "sex" to "gender"

From many people's point of view, Tar Sands is not a negative term. I lived in Calgary many years ago as a university student and Tar Sands was what it was called. If the Tar Sands actually contained chocolate syrup, I am still going to call it Tar Sands because it is a term historically familiar to me and to many people and is not implicitly charged to me because it contains the term "tar". Tar is not a bad thing when it is used properly.

Besides, you know that G West is just trying to get a rise out of you.

Honest words....

Why do you think the thugs want to change the name from TAR SANDS to oil sands?

Because of the traditional 'negative' associations attendant to the word 'tar'...the current environmental holocaust going on in Northern Alberta is aptly described by such references, always has been and always should be.

The attempt to play fast and loose with the emotions and opinions of impressionable and largely stupid people ought to be 'beneath' anyone who has a moral core. At least have the intestinal fortitude to accept the implications and costs of your beliefs…don’t try to hide from them by a facile exercise in re-naming…as Shakespeare said – ‘…a rose by any name, would smell as sweet’…

What we are doing to the country and the atmosphere is a crime against nature and the future of humanity...'tar' with its dirty, black and viscous associations is exactly the right word for this crime...

The fact of the matter is exactly as Dr Alexander has said, a fact which my many relatives in the oil industry and the mechanical engineering field will attest to. At least they are honest enough not to try and lie about what they’re doing.

The name for that region of the Athabaska drainage basin where open pit mining of bitumen is taking place now has always been the Athabaska TAR SANDS...only people with an axe to grind - people like Pee Wee Rambo and Michael Ignatieff - would try to foist such a facile exercise in renaming upon the Canadian people.

They do their cause, honesty and tradition no service whatsoever.

Any opportunity an honest man has to remind a wide range of readers exactly what kind of a shell game such people are up to is an opportunity not to be wasted.

What about shale

Is there a cute nasty colloquial misnomer for that too?

Fort William and Port Arthur should be used too.

realistically, bitumen mining in Canada ...

... can't profit the owners as long as Alberta governments liquidate the capital :

http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Owner_Factsheet.pdf

It's starting to make Canadians wish they were Norwegian.

Harper's NEP ...

... linking his xenophobia with his incompetent management :

http://tinyurl.com/HarpersNewNEP

With friends like Harper, Alberta needs a lot of help getting high.

Maybe from the Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition :

http://www.canada.com/Business/Grit+leader+flatters+Alberta+criticizes+Tories/1760756/story.html

Harper's little helpers ...

... in the Awl Bidness [as the Texans say] aren't even paying the pittance they owe the owners.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Royalty+miscalculations+cost+Alberta+millions/2060530/story.html

The real God-zilla

As long as we have psudo-neo-intellectuals making comments like this Stephen Harper will continue to rise in the polls.

All anyone has to do is scan a few of the comments on YouTube to clearly see that the overwhelming majority of viewers have a much more favourable opinion of Stephen Harper than they had before.

The super-scary 'hidden agenda' that they tried to plaster over him is washing off fast!

Especially when none of the newspapers looks at it. It's not Harper's thoughts that concern me so much, as those of the one who is doing his thinking for him - Darrel Reid. Another man who believes dinosaurs walked the earth 6000 years ago and shares more resemblances to Pastor Fred Phelps than Joe Canuck.
http://dawn.thot.net/harperstiestousa/Darrel_Reid.htm

You know, R'man, you're brighter than you let on. So why're you falling for this cheap shill who's all set to bring Armageddon on so that God can sort us all out? Canvas Goebbels rags aren't a source of news for anyone over the age of 6 not yet reading the comics.

Back to the Point! Harper getting High with help from friends

It seems to me that the friend is quite obviously Rahim Jaffer.

Although I suspect that Rahim's presence around the PMO's office is about as welcome as Mulroney's.

Fishing for compliments in a glass of water

OTTAWA — Jim Flaherty is the finance minister of the year, according to an influential European economic magazine.

Euromoney magazine presented the award to the Canadian finance minister on Tuesday in Turkey.

Well, it would appear that the Economist would disagree with both you and Flaherty. The most the prestigious Economist will credit him with is purchasing his popularity with taxpayer dollars all summer. Not exactly a supernova among finance ministers.

And Harper comes off as venal as Iggy in refusing to make Parliament work. Not exactly a role model for statesmanship, is it?

http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14506460

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man may be king, but he's still handicapped, and we need able-bodied gimps at the wheel of our ship of state.

Of course..

...every once in a while, even the Economist gets it a bit cock-eyed. Editor a little too deep in his cups, perhaps, doing some taste-testing?

http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14419412

Even Vaughn Palmer

...has given up playing Rip Van Winkle and woken from his somnolence.

To read those and other comments from government MLAs is to discover how far the B.C. Liberals have departed from the principles of openness and fiscal discipline they professed when seeking office at the outset of this decade.

For the independent budget officer is a fundamentally populist and taxpayer-friendly notion, in the sense of providing a check on the tendencies of governments of every political stripe to minimize the cost of their promises and the downside of their growth, revenue and deficit projections.

Nor is the proposal necessarily an NDP idea. The Canadian budget officer was proposed by none other than Conservative party leader and ex-Reformer Stephen Harper when running for office in 2006. Now that Harper is prime minister, of course, he's inclined to a somewhat different view

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Time+breed+budget+watchdog/2075088/story.html

0 for 3 retires the side, R'man.

Very much alive

Zalm, what I get from the Economist is this:

"Mr Harper has coped with the political fallout from recession surprisingly well. Unemployment has risen steadily to 8.7%, but Canadians accept the government’s argument that the outside world was to blame. ..."

Fair comment I'd say. If Harper has engendered more support by splashing cash around I'd say that that's what the opposition was crying for back when the idea of a coalition was floated.

The Economist will have to update those poll numbers after the latest on CBC. 25.7 for Iggy (soon to go Pop?) and 39.7 for the Conservatives. That's a 14 point spread. Heck the NDP is only pulling 15.2 in total.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/07/ekos-poll-federal-conservative-liberal-ndp-green-bloc.html#socialcomments

Zalm, you say, "Especially when none of the newspapers looks at it." referring to what I said regarding extremist comments by socialists tarring Harper with that old 'hidden agenda' silliness. Well, the CBC story I've linked to just above already has over 300 on-line comments and it hasn't been 'up' on the web for even one hour yet. I'd have to say that probably means many more have already read it and more will read it, as well as some of the comments and they see those silly extreme comments too and as much as I accept that negative advertising does work, I also believe that negative comments (and advertising) backfire when they go over the top.

correction

The CBC story had been up for about four hours, not the one I said. Nevertheless, check later today (Oct.8.09) and there will almost certainly be over a thousand comments. Some comments have had almost 500 'Agree' clicks too.

Be very afraid!

CBC news reported this morning that the latest Ekos poll found this little performance bumped up Stephen Harper's approval rating 7% overnight. Be Very Afraid!!!

People are being lulled into a false sense of security by this long string of minority Parliaments under Harper & Co. And again, like Dion, the subtle attack ads seem to have successfully planted lingering doubts about Ignatieff, which have solidified over time.

Come on Mr. Harper and Conservatives, you need some significant outburst or error to make people see your true colours.
Otherwise, heaven help us all if this crowd, led by Bushite Harper, gets a majority. You won't recognize this country in five years.

The sheep go one, the sheep go on!

Baaaaa! Baaaaa!

Until they reach the slaughterhouse!

Fair dinkum for fair comment

Zalm, what I get from the Economist is this:

"Mr Harper has coped with the political fallout from recession surprisingly well. Unemployment has risen steadily to 8.7%, but Canadians accept the government’s argument that the outside world was to blame. ..."

Fair comment I'd say.

What the Economist says is that Harper has done a good enough sales job on the media and the public to escape with his head. Remember how he had to be coaxed into stimulating the economy - something Krugman has been calling for ever since is first book on depression economics in 2000?

That's why we Canadians should be very, very afraid. Harper doesn't even read the work of Nobel Prize winners, and his syncophantic advisors are too ideologically taken with their own positions to advise him properly. If Harper had had a majority, how severe do you think the Canadian recession would now be? And how much larger the bonuses paid to Canadian bankers?

I repeat - the Economist called Harper everything but an idiot, and said only that he was a successful salesman. They do not claim he was a leader, and nor do I.

My daily chuckle

The rest of world envies Canada and particularly Canadian banks. They also respect and praise the way this country has been run during the world economic slowdown. Today, unemployment in Canada went.....down. Even CBC reporters intoned their surprise.

Zalm says Harper had to coaxed into stimulating the economy and he doesn't think Harper is a leader. The EKOS poll tells us that Harper leads in approval ratings and the trajectory is up!

So some lefties say Harper released the stimulation funds too late. Other lefties say Harper released too many funds and is now putting us into debt.

I guess the left is fractured and does not speak with one voice. Good. As long as the message is garbled and only yells and yelps that woe is we, it will be properly ignored.

Zalm

Zalm says Harper had to (be) coaxed into stimulating the economy and he doesn't think Harper is a leader.

And Zalm is absolutely right - anyone who doesn't remember the events and statements made during the election campaign of exactly one year ago is clearly suffering some serious memory loss...