The French have a great expression for this, which translates as "Professional Deformation". We should adopt it.

This article lost all credibility with this: "Liberal Blair Wilson won by a similar margin in North Vancouver."

If you don't even know what happened in the last election, I wonder why I should believe anything you say about the upcoming one.

Kingsway will go NDP. Emerson virtually assured it with his boiled dog head comment.

I wish it wouldn't though. David's such a nice guy, I can think of nothing better than watching him sit in Opposition in a minority parliament.

Hey Chris, don't get mad. The Tyee isn't overly connected to reality as it is, and for most people in Vancouver Vancouver, there's no difference between North/West and even East Vancouver. They're all the same.

Why is it that we're not supposed to listen to the pundits, but we are supposed to listen to The Tyee?

Nightbloom:

The last time we adopted anything French, it didn't go so well.

I'm talking about importing Peugot's, of course.

Are we knit picking? Expecting media perfection? C'mon, fellas... the article brags up the higher probabilites of Tyee predicability, sure, but, what did it take in comparison to other media outlets?

And darcy.mcgee... The French haven't adopted "Peugot's" themselves, just came up with the one word expression to simplify the explanation to the power of simplification, itself. Word still works for me. Look at the English language anyways. We've borrowed words from everywhere else. It's what we English do, and it makes sense to do so.

The Liberal incumbent in North Vancouver is, of course, Don Bell and not Blair Wilson.

Thanks for the catch Chris H.

Richard Warnica

Now, generally, I have been a person who votes ideas/politics over personalities. Which I think at just about any other time than this one, certainly in a more ideal proportional rep system, would still be the correct way to do it. We are not, however, in anywhere near an "ideal" time or situation. We are in one of rising and dangerous neoconservatism as the driving ideology of capitalism, on the one hand, and responding to and/or as part of that, a situation of available "official" choices that are scarcely distinguishable one from the other. (Though there is much grounds for suspicion of, even alarm at the motivations of the official "Conservatives" and their new found "centrist" appearance, suddenly this election, and their "middle of the road" platform posture.)

Which is the long way around of saying that essentially, I don't strongly disagree with Brain, this time around.

Save there is one risk to this tactical approach. Which is that the Liberals especially, but no less the Cons, are working mightily to isolate the NDP and Greens, within a "strategic voting environment", and see themselves come out of this with the resurrected two party system, in which one of these two old parties at least, is able to pull off another "majority government"

And if we don't know what that all means by now, and which class sector secures primary benefit from "strong majority government" within capitalism, as a general rule again, then we, the working class stratas and the left haven't learned anything from the post Solidarity 1983 period to here: Minority governments work better for the mass of people.

In my view, the value of multi-party "minority governance" in this neoconservative ruling class period should by now be self-evident. It hampers their ability to pull off anti-working class/ pro-global corporate capitalism enrichment agendas, which they, including the Liberals, would dearly love to get back to-, and as part of their efforts to get on with the deep integration of the country into the US Empire. (To which Martin is no less committed than Harper, and of which Layton is pale, if to be trusted at all himself. I remain to be convinced yet of the strength of Layton's committment to the national sovereigntry of the country. That it isn't just more electoral chatter. And which he noticeably ignores.)

So, while I would say, as a general rule, in this environment, I have no strong disagreement with the notion of voting the "best people" over party labels-,

For how well does any of us really know a particular candidate and how she/he will perform once elected? Mostly, like even voting, "the party", we just think we know.

The central point being, keep an eye to this other reality as well, such as I have attempted to outline above, and keep "the parties" broken up, rather than allow them to overly concentrate and form strong "right-centre" Liberal OR Conservative governments, which is the greater danger.

In my view, what would be the absolute worst possible outcome to this next election-, if any one of them, including NDP, though unlikely, is able to form a strong majority government.

Rather even than voting for personalities per se however, for my part, I am going to vote for Strong Minority Government.

I always vote philosophy of the party over the individual. I kinda liked Jean Charest when he was a federal Conservative, but I would never vote for him because he represented all the neanderthals in the Conservative party. I'm not at all interested in who's a nice person or has good individual ideas because if they go against their party's philosophy, it won't mean a thing.

The great risk of voting personalities for sure, within our system of British style parliamentary governance. Unless one is certain of the independent mindedness of their "personality choice"-, and such pressure is not easy for many people to stand up to. Though it does happen. (And "independents", within this party focussed system and tradition, do not have a good track record of survival. (Though there are exceptions, and this reality is as capable of change as any other. Though for independents, being cut off from access to "party support funds" is no small issue either.)

In all, it certainly justifies some considerable caution, making choices on the basis of "personality" again. Which does not mean that there are not exceptions, such as there are to every rule.

I notice this article started with a picture of candidates Martin and Fry.

Wonder if Ms.Fry will be telling us again, before she gets removed as a MP, about crosses burning on lawns in the interior, or get herself caught writing prescriptions for a patient who doesnt have a particular disease, but a medical plan, to give to a partner that does have a disease has no plan.

Her claim to fame for beating Kimmy Campbell isn't exactly earth shattering as Kim was a sitting duck after Lian Brian had screwed the country big time.

Should be a good one to watch. More fun than watching Haggart get thumped by Libby Davies. Mind you Haggard will end up with a job somewhere in the Liberal machine as we end up wit a minority Liberal government, which is probrably the safest condition for the people of Canada

And in a particular political environment, it should not be forgotten, that a Liberal-Conservative grand alliance is at least as possible as a Liberal-NDP one. Perhaps even more likely. BC demonstrates that to us, at least as much as the Social Democrat-Conservative "grand alliance" in Deutschland.

They are all close enough ideologically, within current neocon capitalism and "the right situation", to be able to "cooperate" with each other in a Grand Alliance. (Which is not to say they will "readily" do so.) For on the real defining issue of the well-being of the status quo corporate capitalist system, none of them is fundamentally disagreed with any other. None of them, even The Greens, poses any real or serious challenge to that unchangeable and underpinning reality whatsoever.

For this reality to change, there would have to emerge a "serious and credible" movement/party that is prepared to challenge the presumption of ongoing status quo capitalism.

DPL - It will be interesting to see what actually happens in Vancouver Centre. Something tells me the candidates' debates in that riding (Vancouver Centre) are going to be the most well-attended in the province (if not the whole country). They're certainly going to be the most entertaining.

Robinson has his own 'living down' to do, and with much more reason that Fry's overblown 'crosses' remark from several years ago. Moreover, Coal Harbour, West-of-Denman, Yaletown and the South side of False Creek are part of the district - areas which I suspect are more favourably disposed towards Fry.

Conversely, Robinson is such a political animal, with quite a mechanism to back him up. He can organize like no one else, and he's always had a committed (dare I say slavish?) queer youth following. It's a compulsion with him - a form of auto-therapy that takes us all on the ride even if we don't want to.

I'm not sure how much the putative "gay vote" is going to help Robinson. Whatever one's personal feelings about it, Bill C-38 resolved the last outstanding goal of the community that rested within federal competence. There's a sense now that we need someone who can defend the gains made while pacifying the critics...not a polarizing figure. It's time for the community to get introspective and start cleaning up its own house. Lord knows there's a lot that needs to be done. I found Robinson's opportunistic grand standing in the Middle East to be too much. That kind of leadership would be counter-productive for the gay community right now. Moreover, his martyr-like willingness to do jail-time for an illegal environmental protest doesn't jive with his evasion of hard time for the shoplifing fiasco.

His improvised attempt to become a poster-boy for mental illness hardly boosts my confidence. His evasions are strangely reminiscent of André Boiclaire's prickly and schizoid show-&-tell then shut-them-up handling of his cocaine revelations. As a gay man, I'm concerned about our public image if we keep putting our worst foot (feet!) foward in the public eye. There are some hard working 'Steady Eddy' gay men in public life right now, and I don't think they need to burden them with the company of sociopaths (I know, that's harsh). Hey, just because he's mentally ill and effective at getting attention (any attention!) doesn't mean you have to vote for him.

Boy that’s sure a whale of a picture of Hedy, with Paul

I agree with you regarding Svend, nightbloom. I'd be disappointed to see him win, simply because I don't think he's ever honestly explained his actions about stealing that ring.

I don't see how being bi-polar makes you a thief.

In fact if you study the bi-polar illness, you'll discover that one of the symptoms of the manic phase is the irresponsible giving away of possessions and huge purchasing of things you don't need.

And I had massive respect for the guy before that strange adventure.

Bi-polar people might act weird, but they retain their moral boundaries.

I don't believe Svend.

And I was choked by his grand-standing in the middle east, too.

Do not be lured by soft-peddled calls to vote for the candidate.

Yes, David Cadman proved to be a popular independant who got elected as much because he stood up to the goons in the Conservative/Reform alliance after being booted. He then caught the hearts and minds of an electorate ready for change in his riding.

Yes, he did vote on a couple of issues that kept the federal Liberal government alive at a time when the vast majority of the country did not want a forced election.

And, yes, he got the hero's treatment from mainstream media partly for that and the timing which came days before his death from cancer.

Thus sainthood was assured, not so much by anyone's old fathers behind any pearly gates but, by a media that simply doesn't quite know what to do with people who do unusual things.

If they can't classify you as a sinner (or a Socialist), and you aren't likely to come back to haunt them, the media can sometimes be overly generous with it's depictions.

While a hard working MP can get some things done for constituents, most voters will only benefit if the MP's party is successful in having legislation created or stopped.

Keep your faith in a system that starts and ends right here on earth rather than buying into the pipe dreams of those who insist the only salvation is through a diety.

My Predictions:

Vancouver
Vancouver Centre:
Macleans magazine did a real pro-Liberal hatchet job on Svend Robinson in its late December 2005 issue with a front title saying "Svend Him Packing" which included questioning Svend's mental faculties. It may generate Svend some sympathy and voters there may forgive Svend's indiscretion in 2004 just to spite the Toronto editors of Macleans as Svend notes. If Martins fortunes continue to decline, I think voters will switch to Svend over Hedy.

Vancouver Kingsway:
David Emerson's stupid 'egg boiled' comments may drive support away from him even among traditional pro-Liberal Chinese voters here. Most decent Chinese voters don't approve the idea of using a Chinese proverb to compare a woman like Olivia Chao to a dog. This setback, plus the fact that Waddell will have the support of popular local NDP MLAs like Adrien Dix, could propel the NDP to victory given their strong base of support here.

Vancouver Island:
Esquimalt:
This riding should definitely fall to the NDP. THE NDP candidate--Mr. Garrison has loads of volunteers--while the Lib. incumbent Keith Martin has complained--in a recent Vancouver Province story on his riding, about the lack of volunteers for his campaign here. If a Liberal incumbent can say this in the major newspaper, it tells me that Keith Martin thinks he is in a lot of trouble!

Victoria:
With the popular David Anderson retiring, the NDP ought to capitalize on this opportunity and capture this riding since NDP Provincial leader Carole Jmaes lives here ande will support the NDP candidate and 2)the new Liberal candidate has the undortunate name of David MULRONEY! That may be enough to "scare" poential liberal supporters to the NDP's welcoming arms.

Surrey:
Surrey North
Surrey North is a definite NDP win. Dona Cadman has endorsed NDP candidate Penny Priddy who is one of the most loved and respected politicians in BC today. And that isn't saying much1 Also, Surrey North is a blue collar riding that contains while the provincial NDP candidates here won 55-60% of voters support in the June 2005 election here. I'm Conservative by nature but I gladly voted for Ms. Priddy in the 1996 BC Provincial elections; she was the ONLY redeeming feature in Glen Clark's disastrous NDP government.

Newton-North Delta:
This riding is a real toss up. From the large numbers of Sukh Dhaliwal liberal election signs, it seems SADLY that Sukh is harnessing the Indo-Canaddian vote which comprises 40-50% of the vote and should win this riding. Unlike Chinese Canadians who don't mind supporting a Caucasians candidate that espouses their views on social or economic issues, Indo-Canadians tend to be quite clannish and will vote only for an Indo-Canadian. The other candidates--Nancy Clegg of the NDP and the Conservatives Phil Eidswick are behind the eight ball because of this ethnic vote. I remember in 2004 seeing many pro-Gurmal Grewal Conservative signs on the lawns of Indo-Canadian owned private homes but ominously they haven't reappeared in support for Phil Eidswick's campaign this time. This suggests to me that Grewal's Indo-Canadian supporters will sit out this vote or support Sukh Dhaliwal. Unless Harper can create a tidal surge of Conservative support in Canada by January 23, I think this riding is lost to the incumbent Conservatives.

Fleetwood-Port Kells:
Nina Grewal should win this riding--despite her husband's antics--because this riding voted for the Liberals provincially in June 2005. Also, the riding encompasses socially Conservative Port Kells and parts of North Cloverdale. Nina won this riding by a comfortable margin--and given the just released Strategic Council poll suggesting Conservative support in BC has risen to 40%--she should hold it by a comfortable margin again. The fact she is Indo-Canadian may also appeal to many Indo-Canadian voters in Fleetwood since her opponents are all non-Indo Canadians.

Well, that's it for now. I won't comment on Richmond, North or West Vancouver since I don't know this ridings.

Could I add another interesting race? OK, Trinity Spadina isn't in B.C., but it includes the downtown core of Canada's largest city as well as famous landmarks such as the CN Tower and Royal Ontario Museum and University of Toronto. It includes the area in front of the Eaton Centre where a girl was killed by random gang violence. Trinity Spadina has a population of 106,090, nearly half are immigrants with diverse backgrounds. Ianno has a strong Italian following. Olivia Chow has a strong Chinese and U. of T. following.

In 2004, Liberal incumbent Tony Ianno won with only 805 votes more than Olivia Chow, giving him a fourth term in the riding. This is Chow's 3rd try.

ELECTION 2004 VOTE TALLY
Liberal 23,202
NDP 22,397 or 42% of the votes
Conservative 4,605
Green Party 2,259
Progressive Canadian 531
Marxist-Leninist 102

If the conservatives form a minotity goverment will they be able to pass any contentious legislation?
i.e.-huge cuts to social programs and health-care, reinstatemnt of the death penalty, deep integration with the US etc. etc.

Forseth, Paul

Is the conservative MLA in my riding, he won by only 122 votes over the NDP, I see the NDP taking the riding this time especially because failed MLA Joyce Murray is running for the Fed Libs who took over 13,000 votes last time, I can see some shifting to the NDP over Joyce who can't figure our why she lost her
seat after saying nothing over St Mary's hospital being bulldozed under her watch.

All of you prognosticators have missed the point of the article: you're no better than a pack of monkeys in figuring out who will win. With that said, I'll join the club: the most likely outcome is a minority government that wholly depends on the Bloc for its survival. The Bloc will be so much bigger than the NDP, that the NDP's influence will be zero, simply based on the mathematics of the makeup of the house of commons.

A distinct possibility, as this election goes along and the Liberal record begins to catch up with it, I think. Which is not to say that I am thrilled with the prospect.

Still, even if this turns out to be so, I think they will have difficulty pushing through any seriously reactionary "neoconservative" agenda, at least along a very broad front. They will need support, in order to do so, and contrary to Martin's full of shitt prognostications above, I hope, the reality is, the Bloc has more or at least as much in commong with the NDP as it does the Conservatives. The Bloc are really more a Quebec NDP/Liberal Franco alliance movement.

Save in one area, where it will vote with the Conservatives, dare they to push that agenda-, which they might well; provincial rights. Which, of course, have a two fold purpose: In order to placate and dangle a carrot in front of Quebec nationalism-, and their own innate neoconservative tendency to be this country's "states' rightists", as part of the corporatist agenda of divide/fragment to rule, and to serve up the Canadian State to the US Empire, which is where "Corporate/Ruling Class Canada" really wants to go anyway. (Though the Bloc itself, I am convinced, has to be more fearful of an ascendent "anglo" US Empire influence on Quebec itself, and the "integrationist" pressures that would then be focussed on them from a historically "less tolerant of diffences" Imperial USA, than they are fearful of an "relatively" harmless and more inclined to be soft and "accomodating" Canada. Which is not to say that they will resign themselves forever to "provincial" status within Canada either.At some point, barring a re-negotiated "founding nations realities" agreement, I am convinced they will eventually actually go, especially in this neoconservative period of "standard of living" decline anyway.)

So, a "minority" Conservative government, in my read of the tea leaves, will not be able to ram through any reactionary "social conservative" agenda any time soon, by way of attacking the "historical social contract", but with Bloc support it may well be able to "sneak" through serious damage to it, by way of fragmented "provincial rights" measures. Which, of course, over the longer term is no less harmful, indeed even more harmful, from the perspective of the handing up of the nation to US Imperialism, to whom they are the really most toadying "US Party in Canada". And which is really the potentially most damaging prospect of this election, were the Conservatives to even secure a "minority government" toe hold.

And which is why it is necessary to understand why these under the table Conservative political cocksuchers are so godamned dangerous. They are Fascists and betrayers of the nation in drag, dressed up as mere excessive rouge and lipstick harlots.

Professor Andrew Heard of SFU (Poli Sci) maintains a very useful website, relevant to this discussion.

Here is his table of 'marginal seats' - i.e. those ridings which were won by less than 5% of the popular vote.

http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/marginal-seats.html

Dear Coyote,
The Conservatives under Harper aren't "Fascists" or "Betrayers of the Nation" as you claim. They're loyal members of the Opposition who want to keep Canada together--unlike the BLOC separatists who want to tear it up. They just want to run Government more efficiently, reduce taxes and give people more options on using daycare and public transit. Your comments sounds more like propaganda.

Harper isn't some extreme crack-pot leader. He was born and raised in Toronto for the fisrt 17 years of his life and was even a member of the Young Liberals in his local riding before he moved to Alberta in the late-1970's for a job.(and changed his politics in the process) Everyone who knows Harper knows that he is a Fiscal Conservative--not one of those Social Conservatives who would turn back the clock on abortion and impose capital punishment. That's why his Party endorsed a woman's right to an abortion at their Party Conference last year. What's wrong with the conservative's stress on increasing provincial rights anyway--the Liberals haven't really competently carried out their Federal responsibilities like protecting the Canada-US border from gun smugglers. Just ask the Canada Customs Union which has futilely pleaded with the Federal Liberals to provide their employees with firearms for protection against the threat posed by gun and drug smugglers--the same people who bring death and tragedy to Canada's cities.

Yes, if elected Harper would have an "free and open vote" on same Sex Marriage to placate his social conservative base of supporters but it wouldn't pass in Parliament--the Bloc, Liberal and NDP MPs would vote against it. But then Harper knows that.

"Yes, if elected Harper would have an "free and open vote" on same Sex Marriage to placate his social conservative base of supporters...."

And what else would he do to placate his base?

Regarding Goodale/Trustgate, I am worried that this alleged scandal will prove too late to be nothing more than political opportunism. We are vulnerable to interference at this critical time in our electoral process.

Imagine an anti-Liberal think-tank, Canadian or otherwise, that hatches a scheme to nudge Stephen Harper to victory by way of a carefully timed stock market rumour. When traders react predictably, a raucous cry of corruption is raised against the Liberals. Canadians, being sensitive on the subject of government ethics just now, are moved to vote Conservative. By the time the dust has settled, the election is over. What does it matter if the allegations prove to be groundless?

To some Canadians, this might seem far-fetched. However, I think not. Traders buy on the rumour and sell on the news as a part of daily business. As to political manipulation, Americans experienced far worse than this during their past two elections.

Without real evidence of wrongdoing, Canadian voters and media should consider the possibility that they are being had here.

I'll have to agree with Fabian, on the conservatives not being fascists. Fascists were for big authoriatarian national governments. While some conservative social vlaues and hard law and order values may be seen as having some similaritities to past regimes, neo-conservatism and free market economics are actually fundamentally at ends with fascism.

Also, fascism is tied to extreme nationalism to the point of obsession, which makes Coyote's "they are Fascists and betrayers of the nation in drag" a contradiction.

You would be a fascist if you believed in:
a) National Collective Identity. (Possibly race or religious based)
b) Strong Managed Economy
c) Believed in autocracy rather than democracy.
d) Militaristic and police state

I am no fan of the Liberals, but this is a very astute observation, I think.

American influence, dirty tricks...that bilderberg nudging of Stephen Harper into power...nope, not far-fetched at all.

Coyote

Fascism
A definition of fascism;
A social and
political ideology with the primary guiding principle that the state or nation is the highest priority rather than personal or individual freedoms.
God knows this is already what we got and is what I want to flee from.
The Liberal Daycare Program could be considered fascist, as well as many other aspects of our unique Canadian experience.
As Jimi Hendrix said " are you experienced ? "
And I must include the CRTC as an evil nuisance in our experience.

Marriage falls under civil laws and is a provincial jurisdiction, not a federal one. And the courts of this country have upheld the right of same sex marriage in 7 of the provinces and territories, which have provided legislation enabling such.

While I can understand some variance in civil laws in the different provinces/ territories (eg Quebec's is based on the Napoleonic Code, not British Civil Law), how is it conceivable that we could have a different federal law on marriage than that which is provided for in 7 provinces and territories, should Parliament somehow reconsider and change its previous decision on the matter? The inconsistency makes my head swim... And if Harper is the champion of the provinces that he professes to be, why is he challenging the provincial authority in this matter? Unless he's merely throwing a bone to the bigots...

Kurt ' I agree with you that appears that Provincial jurisdiction should apply to contracts between individuals of common consent.
And I expect that same spirit to be extended to other outsiders .
So where is the catch ? I want all minorities to be granted the same respect.

Mussolini's definition of fascism is more useful...

And this is what the corporate capiltalist parties stand for (i.e., Conservatives, Republicans and Democrats) since they gotta keep their financial backers, arms manufactures amongst others, happy.

I am rather thinking that the corruption in the Liberal government might be signs of a move - deliberately or not - towards what Chalmers Johnson calls a "capitalist development state" (e.g., Japan, South Korea, China and Taiwan) where govenemnt bureaucrats and big business collude so that a free market economy is but a fiction.

I mean isn't that how the BC Liberals privatized BC Rail? Dave Basi and other ministerial assistants are now facing charges of influence peddling in the sale of BC Rail, but if they had done the same thing in a Chinese or Japanese context they would not have been brought up on charges: it is just the way the capitalist development economy works.

I believe Blair Wilson’s riding overlaps part of N. Van.

I dealt with Andy Burton when he was an MP. He phoned my office on a regular basis in regards to issues affecting his riding. He was always polite and wished to hear our side of the story. Never played the part of “I’m a MP and you better do as I say”

Svend certainly gained a lot of respect in his riding, because he worked hard for the people he represented, I know hard core anti-NDP types that like him (well before the ring thing)

Regardless of who is running in your riding, a vote for the Liberals is a vote for corruption.

Indeed a more useful definition of "fascism" than those provided by our neocon trolls above, such as Ron Erwin, for example, who would have you believe that publicly funded daycare for working families is fascistic, or the defence of the nation from US Imperialist takeover, as in the case of Dangrice. Just let the free capitalist market happen, whatever its destructive consequences on ordinary lives. It is the thin, cheesy-cloth veil behind which they attempt to hide themselves and their real intentions.

What a joke this Braunshirt troop is here.

Hitler, at least tactically, submitted to the rules of normal "bourgeois democracy" to the point he was elected to the German parliament. Thereafter, arising out of ruling class fears of major Communist Party and Socialist influence in Germany, and with the collusion of the German economnic ruling class elites (the "corporatists", and their political "managers", and the remnants of the old German aristocracy), he was handed the Chancellorship of the State by the old Weimar Republic Chancellor, and promptly engineered his elevation to the position of supreme ruler, or Der Fuhrer, and the suspension of the old democracy.

(And I know we have been over this ground before, but every once in awhile, it seems, this issue needs to be repeated, over the attempts of the current "Neoconservatives" to obfuscate this important issue.)

Fascism, historically, or even the new Corporatism, Global "Free" Market face of it has, and would again, in my view, uses either "democracy", or what passes for it, or outright dictatorship, depending upon the usefullness or expedience of either, or what the particular situation allows. (This crew calls itself "Conservatives". The old fascists called themselves, "National Socialists." Whatever works.)

There is currently no immediate threat to the Corporate Capitalist State in any of the major States of advanced capitalism anywhere, so normal "capitalist democracy" is more the order of the day. (Even Franco's Fascist Spain handed off the capitalist State back to "constitutional democracy" once all threat of "communism/socialism" was past. Ditto General Pinochet in more recent Chile.) Were serious threats to the supremacy of the ruling class Corporatist Order to arise however, one could reasonably expect, on the basis of historical experience, in Germany and Italy for example, where the latter was also up against a strong national Communist Party, and ditto Franco's Spain, that grounds would be found for the suspension of "normal democracy" and the emergence of more "normal Fascist" forms of rule.

So, again on the basis of the historical record, and our currently accumulating experience with the new face of "drifting towards Suit and Tie Fascism" built into the dynamic of the newer Global Corporatism friendly "Neoconservatism" of such as our own "Conservative Party", the situation is actually much more complex than its adherents here would have you believe. They depend upon either your duplicity, or better even yet, naivete to be a match of their own.

They will have their own view of themselves and the hisory and lessons of previous fascisms, of course. We need not share though.

And my argument above is not that the Communists of any, what became, "Fascist" states above, would have "necessarily" produced any better a result than the Fascists.Though, in fairness, it also has to be said that while Canadian Conservatives are their own, and British Conservatives likewise, even while having overarching "similarities", so "Soviet Communists", German and Italian, as well as Latin American Commmunists were and are "their own".

Still though, it has to be noted, that the "old Communism", wherever it was established, paradoxically resulted in the emergence of precisely "Capitalism" rather than the "stated objective" in those states-, often with a content far from dis-similar to "fascism". (Which is a very important point, on which I agree with Fait Lux, for example.)

All of which says much also about a certain inevitability to the historical rise of capitalism out of backward and feudal states, even very currently, like Vietnam for examples, as much as England, the birth mother of all capitalisms out of the English Civil War. But which speaks also, I think to the naive and inadequate understanding of the old Communists and socialist, about what it would precisely take, in terms of philosophical, social, economic and political realities, and our understanding of them, to finally move beyond and away from capitalism and its inherently gross "class" and other inadequacies.

Which changes not the realities of fascism addressed in my previous post, one single jit. Merely the balance of my arguments and views some.

He's not running in his old riding though. He's never run in Vancouver Centre before. The last time Burnaby-Douglas sent him to the H of C it was by a substantially reduced margin.

You're correct that he was respected for the hard work he did for his riding. Nothwithstanding his escapades, he's always been a diligent and devoted representative (credit where credit's due).

, offers Coyote as he rightly dumps on our pal Ron E. for his silly childcare rant.

But just for the shortest of seconds I truly thought Coyote was talking about the new reality south of Canada where manufactured paranoia is a growth industry that ironically gets lots of government dollars while the poor are left (as we say in New Orleans) to swim for themselves.

nightbloom, thanks for the correction

Indeed, as Allan correctly points out, even in the current USA, which has much, as a result of its empire building role in the world and its treatment of other States, especially in the Middle East, created and/or perceives a threat to itself and its capitalist system and its "right of Empire", is very much reacting in the classic "fascist" way of "suspending" major elements of democracy and equal treatment at home, adherence to international law on invading other countries, militarism, torture, media/propaganda manipulation, and arbitrary "dictatorial behaviour". (Goodle )

How much of the threat is real, self-created and/or magnified to manipulate public opinion, we can debate, of course. But that it is happening is startlingly obvious-, and should be perceived threatening and potentially dangerous to our own country. And in all the talk of the need for this country to take seriously our military preparedness, with which I very much agree, needs to be given no less, nay more weight than the notion of Osama Bin Laden launching an act of terrorism, in retaliation for our flunky role serving the US military around the world, including the Middle East. (The Globe and Mail of a day or two ago had a big spread on the history of US war plans to invade this country, which continue even yet. And of one offical 1921 contingency plan of Canada to invade the US-, which is hard to take seriously today, I know.)

That Harper guy is kind of creepy. He wants to sign into the defense shield over the continet. Even most Americans are against this insane idea. The defense shield is designed to fill our atmosphere with radioactive isotopes with the intention of distrupting any incoming missile's gyroscopes, rendering them useless. That's why it's called a shield. Harper may not concern himself nor care about the atmosphere, but the rest of the world does. And will someone please tell me what the Americans have done to reduce thier carbon emmisions below Canada's. Other than moving thier industrial base to China, where are the technical improvements that would account for the differences?

Corporate rule is a hideous reality and Mr. Martin has been a player, at times as ruthless and unethical as any of his competitors. He has done what it takes to succeed in big business, all very ugly. However, he is a patriot who shows a willingness to defend us from the insane leadership down south and to defend minority rights.

Mr. Harper, on the other hand, gets an F in both subjects. This man will engage us in war. Our youth would be coming home in body bags right now if we had heeded his call to join the US in Iraq. Wherever his true allegiances lie, they certainly aren't with the broad spectrum of Canadian society. Most disturbing are the overtures he has made to the Bush administration.

Conservative-minded citizens of both Canada and the US have had their parties hijacked by far right-wing elements that find more solidarity with each other than with the remainder of the people in their own countries. Dick Cheney and friends are enriching themselves obscenely and bankrupting their fellow Americans under the guise of a just war and an endless terrorist threat.

What does Stephen Harper see in these people that would make him want to cuddle up? Is it simply the Christian fundamentalist values they purport to share? Hard to say, but I surely do not want Mr. Harper guiding the ship. This is a man who choked when asked if he loved Canada. His attempts at smiling in public are painfully unnatural. His wife and fellow party members are all under muzzle for fear they let something slip. To me, Harper is beyond creepy.

And what would we have been able to send to Iraq even if we wanted to? We can barely support the mission in Afghanistan, likely our biggest support would have been a couple of ships and some Staff Officers. Our military has been crippled by years of neglect and it’s only the fear of embarrassing causalities that is pushing them to replace vehicles that they should never had bought in the first place.

Harper answered Martin’s attack on his loyalty, by saying; “How loyal is a man who registered his ships offshore to avoid paying taxes and Canadian laws. It was a good answer. Harper is not perfect, but creepy? What I find creepy is how people can vote for the Liberals after all the crap they have done. Martin is like the pickpocket that yells “fire” while he steals your wallet. What you are doing is fear mongering on a lot of maybes and what ifs. Martin has promised to seize private property (firearms) despite clear evidence form his own government agencies that it will not have any effect, basically trampling on the rights of over 2 million Canadians and all to gather votes and stay in power. ( Not to mention 30 million and up it will cost to pursue, and remember how the gun registry was only going to cost $200 million, not 2 billion as it is now)

I would rather have Harper in a majority government with a good opposition keeping his nose to the grindstone, rather than the Liberals feeding at the trough again and laughing at the fools that elected them.

Comment to Eddy Haskel -

The USA provided emission numbers from the 2000-2001 period for publication to coincide with the "Climate Change Confenrence." These numbers were artifically low due to the initial "Bush Recession". The current numbers (for 2004 - 2005) were marginally published in certain US media after the conference. Those emission numbers were very high and put the US not only well above Canadian emissions but again established the USA as the #1 polluter/consumer in the world - 25% of the world's emissions and consumption of fossil fuels.

To Coyote -

Thank you for your comments. You give us hope and great despair and you are right. We are currently citizens of "the Empire" but have been in the queue for immigration to Canada since the submission of our application in January 2004 - coincidental to the initial breaking of the Sponsorship situation. We completed a journey of Canada in 2003 - a cri du coeur if you will. Tenting our way from east to west. Anyway, we considered a number of possible options out of the empire and for many reasons choose to Canada. We are now in a 30 day window (coincidental with this election!) of receiving our visas. Due to all of your observations and the astute observations of others on "The Tyee" web site -one of us is having anxiety attacks and the other is still calm and in a wait mode. We believe that Harper is receiving guidance from the "Rovarians" here in the USA. His campaign is truly a reflection of Bush 2000. Anyway, is the Canada "we will to be" still there? Or will Canada be a "colony" of the Empire. Things in the USA are beyond any imagining. The only constant is fear, the manufacturing of fear and the financing of fear. Oh yes, and the continual rise of the $8.1 trillion dollar debt. We have lived and worked in other countries and to us Canada is ubi bene, ibi patria "where it is well with me, there is my country." Thank you again for your extraordinary discourse.

Stephan Harper is no benign alternative. He is an extreme neo-con in the Ralph Klein, Mike Harris and George W.Bush mold.

His opinions are there for all to see, from the National Citizen's Coalition, the firewall around alberta, the letter to the Wall Street Journal appologising for Canada not sending troops to Iraq and various appearances on Fox News. He is a strong social conservative who belives in big government involving itself into peoples personal lives.

Now in this election he is trying to portray himself and his party as moderates whose policies are 180 degrees different from previous statements.

Tax dollars are for prisons and fighter jets not health car.

Debt is okay as well, as long as it is to fund tax breaks for the rich, prisons and fighter jets.

Do not forget, the Reform/Alliance took over the Progressive Conservatives and dropped the progressive from the party.

They have an agenda, it is no secret and they have not changed their beliefs. This is marketing.

The Liberals are like a bad smoking habit,people are fearful to quit but once they do, they wonder, why did they put up with that dirty, filthy habit for so long.

Pilgrim,

Good luck to you folks. I hope you are successful in your efforts to immigrate to Canada. (I like the cut of your political jib. :-)

Canada in recognizable form is still here, even if chamging fast with the infection of the country with "Neoconism" from the USA. Certainly though, this country still has much to offer over the USA, for ordinary folks.

Besides, it ain't over 'til it's over, and I cannot believe, at the end of the day, that Canadians will roll completely over and offer up its neck to The Empire. Our ruling class and its neoconservative sucks, which you will read even here, are another matter however, in all political parties.

In any case, hope springs eternal, eh?

Welcome. I hope it works out for you and yours.

Good one, Woody. My chuckle for the day. 8-D

Ain't it the bloody truth?

Paul Martin thinks he has a good comparison between the National Daycare Program and our health care system.
The story goes " Imagine is when my father, Tommy Douglas and Lester Pearson were sitting around designing our health care system, many years ago, that they decided to simply give everyone $25.00 per week and call it a program ? "
Imagine if I had saved this $1,200.00 per year for the past forty years, compounding with interest in the bank all this time ?
With $250,000.00 in this medical saving account right now I could travel to The Mayo Clinic for my health care.
And The Supreme Court wouldn't have declared it illegal either.
What a dumb analogy he's made.
But he thinks we are that stupid.
Don't give this idiot any more chances.

How ever you don't want to give up smoking to take up the crystal meth pipe just to say you quit cigarettes.

A Harper quote

“The world is now unipolar and contains oÂ*nly oÂ*ne superpower. Canada shares a continent with that superpower. In this context, given our common values and the political, economic and security interests that we share with the United States, there is now no more important foreign policy interest for Canada than maintaining the ability to exercise effective influence in Washington so as to advance unique Canadian policy objectives.” (Canadian Alliance Defence Policy Paper: The New North Strong and Free, May 5, 2003)

In short we should not integrate any foreign policy interest without a rubber US stamp first, nothing must be advanced on a global stage without proper US approval. Welcome to the new Canada and client state.

How Harper see's Canada, tell me this guy is not a fundamentalist ready to put Canada threw shock waves like seen in BC and with the Harrisites in ONT, Alberta's dream child.

“Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status…” (National Post, Dec. 8 2000 p. A18)

Stuart, Thank's for telling us what we already know. This guy Harper is brilliant.

What Harper fails to see is that people respect pride and courage and not submission.
A true partner deals with someone eye to eye and not on their knees like a Harper or should
I say ear lobes. He seems to think Canada can only become better by playing good dog and
roll over.

Your so predictable Ron, only you could fantasize about becoming the next US
client state, do you have your US flag out yet Ronnie, your stripes are starting
to show.

As I said before Stuart, Harper's past speeches and such should be Liberal ads.

Meanwhile the NDP should be attacking the Liberals like a junkyard dog because that's where our support bleeds and besides, the lyin Libs have it coming.

Coyote - Thank you for your response and words of encouragement.

Mr. Erwin - May I ask, Sir, have you ever experienced the type of policies you support, a.k.a., Mr. Harper? For example, traveled to the USA and used the health care system? We have utilized the Canadian Health Care system (paid as we should) when we were visiting and became ill. There is no comparison. In the USA the first sign you always encounter in any clinic, hospital, or health care facility is "Payment is required before service is rendered." Second sign, "Weapons are not allowed in the medical facility." No payment you are sent to the emergency room of a hospital - private hospitals can refuse you, public ones may take you. It is a mindful experience to know in Canada that every person on the bus, in the street, in the clinic or in the shelter has the equality of health care. By the way, our care in a clinic in Canada was far superior to anything we would have received in the USA. Be careful for what you wish for. Oh, in saving your $250,000 - in the USA that is one hospital visit of a couple of weeks with major surgery and medications and follow-up care. Example, breast cancer surgery with chemo and follow-up therapy. If you like, Sir, we can discuss another issue that seems to interest you -social housing in the USA, a.k.a., prisons.

Frank,

Yup. Re directly above. That they are not tells us more about the NDP than they might wisely wish to reveal.

I find it just too regrettable that I feel I have no choice but to vote for them.

No. It's late, I've been working hard all day, I'm pulling on a wee dram, and I don't want to get into it. :-) (In many ways, I work harder since I retired than I did "workin' fer the man.)

Two chuckles in one day. I won't be able to stand it. :-D

Ron, on the other hand, is such an idiot and too pathetic a twit to be funny. One just shakes their head and says, "This guy has got to be here to discredit the Neocon cause. One just can't be this stupid and openly traitorous."

It's like Harper, who gags on the issue of his loyalty to Canada. Though Ron Swervin' is likely gagging on quite something else. George's Bush. :-)

Nah! Can't be.

George can't be that well endowed, that he would set Ron to gagging. I mean, this is the ruling class brat what chickenhawked out of a Vietnam tour, and then plays Mr. Big Man sending poor working class and black kids off to Iraq, to fight his Rich Man's War.

"Some folks call you The Elite. I call you my base."

Sounds more about 1/2 cocked to me. 8-X

On the other hand, maybe Swervin' Erwin has an itty-bitty, tiny wee mouth.

Pilgrim, Ron knows all about the US, he's met Texans in Alberta and listens to Seattle radio.

Welcome to Canada. I'm more than happy to accept Bush refugees.

Coyote, I have no idea why the NDP pulls this namby-pamby thing at the federal level. But then I supported Bill "Fire-eater" Blaikie. I know he would have lit into bumbling Martin like a dung beetle to... you get the idea.

The Libs are actually getting away with their wrapping themselves in the flag and spouting left-wing dogma for the umpteenth time without anyone demanding why they didn't do all this in the last 13 years!

I can understand Con voters, NDP voters and Greens but I can't figure out how this gang of crooks actually gets anyone's vote. This isn't the 19th century, yet its like Martin makes speeches from the backs of trains and communication links being what they were no one is informed enough to know he's lying. 13 years they've been in power and yet he has the gall to promise something they promised 13 years ago.

The NDP should reprint copies of the Liberal Red Book of 1993 and send it to every house in the country showing what they promised and what they actually did.

i actually feel bad for the lefties in vancouver centre. hedy fry versus svend robinson. a brain-dead freeloader versus a convicted thief. god help us, what has this country come to?

Elliot, Elliot... that's what happens when you allow a convicted drunk driver to become premier.

It's such a slippery slope, ya know... :-)

It is, pretty soon you'll be handing $60,000+ in untendered contracts to your bankrupt relatives, ministerial aides will be found to own houses acting as grow-ops, nation-wide searches for the best will find your buddy is the guy and the RCMP will be carrying boxes out of your ministerial offices after you sold off a provincial railroad. Is there no end to the corruption and law-breaking?

Nathan Cullen will get my support again. The riding got more with an NDP MP than from years of Reformatories.
I hope some of the voters here noticed that!

apples and oranges lynn. unless you're a lefty trying to justify svend's pre-meditatied grand larceny. lefties will do that you know.

ohh..I'm not trying to justify anything, Elliot... just that there is little cause for self-righteousness on the apple, the orange or the pineapple sides of the political spectrum... especially little cause for it from a faithful supporter of the BC Liberals like you.

Frank's cited quite an infamous list of corruption above...as they say...for whom the bell tolls...

As it stands, Canadians don't seem to have any better ideas than to boo the USA at the World Junior Hokey Tournament.
What an inferior position we put ourselves into when we THINK ( wrong ) that we are emulating our adversaries.
If this WJHT ( IIHA ) was being played in Edmonton or Calgary, the fans would have been very courteous.
It indicates to me, that the Vancouver audience showed no class.
We all have the right of free speech so I cannot criticize, but all those fans should be aware that they represent a typical Latte drinking liberal attitude that is only bettered in Toronto.
Congratulations you twits.

methinks you and frankie-boy should get used to these guys since they're going to be around for some time to come. i wonder how many new leaders the socialist hordes will go through before they get it right?

Oh who knows Elliot, maybe we'll win the next one and maybe we won't. Most people in this province and in this country for that matter don't mind corruption and law-breaking. I know if we get rid of the federal Libs I'll be happy for some time. Getting rid of both sets of corrupt Libs would be probably asking for too much at once.

Ron, do you watch hockey? If you don't want to see your boys get booed tell them to keep their elbows to themselves.

'Most people in this province and in this country for that matter don't mind corruption and law-breaking.' you mean the teachers frank?

Actually I meant you Elliot

Okay Eddy, I really want to see the link where you got this statement from:

The defense shield is designed to fill our atmosphere with radioactive isotopes with the intention of distrupting any incoming missile's gyroscopes, rendering them useless. That's why it's called a shield. Harper may not concern himself nor care about the atmosphere, but the rest of the world does

There are a lot of valid criticisms of the shied idea, but I never heard this before.

Frank wrote:

The NDP should reprint copies of the Liberal Red Book of 1993 and send it to every house in the country showing what they promised and what they actually did.

Ah yes Chairman Martin’s little red book a.k.a. “How not to run a Cultural Revolution”

I was thinking the same thing yesterday

Colin, it comes from a book I read called 'Planet Earth'. It had a small subtitle I can't recall. It was about using the planet as a weapon. It described well documented atmospheric nuclear testing and it's effects on the various layers of the atmospere. Apparently, nuclear fallout will stay suspended above us, if it is high enough in the atmosphere and then slowly gravitate towards the poles of the planet. That means that the nuclear fallout must be constantly released in order to sustain the shield. The book should be in any municipal library, in the 350 political section.

I think that any party (Provincialy or Federaly) that gets in on bald faced lies then does the the exact opposit, Gordo BC Rail, BC Ferries, Terasen, cutting old growth etc should be thrown out of office, that way we the people will win and can at last have real leaders that are "For the People by the People"

ask and you shall receive.

I think this is the book Colin

http://www.iicph.org/planet_earth.htm

Eddy
Thank you, as of my last reading the current system being proposed and tested is based around a modified Patriot missile (of which one may be stationed in Alaska) and upcoming ground based lasers. I suspect what you read about is one of the least feasible ideas being kicked around. How would a few Isotopes influence a gyroscope travelling at a several Mach’s? Even if they could cause an error, you would not know which error would be induced and the missile could land anywhere.

The proposed system has a lot of problems, is expensive and is heavily contested even in military circles (the chances of actually knocking out a missile with another missile is very slight)

The main threat this “shield” is designed to deal with is 1-2 missiles launched from North Korea or from a ship. Even the current Russian Missile arsenal could easily overwhelm it and they are now building new missiles that have defence counter-measures.

The most Canada could contribute to such a system is the placement of early warning devices. Harper opinion is that it is better to be part of discussions regarding the missile defence and having a say, rather than the Liberal approach of pretending it’s not happening.

The problem with the interceptor method of misile defense is that sort of defense is not reliable. Read the book because it says so much more than just nuclear testing in our atmosphere. It will help explain the simple mechanics of the planet and how the practice of warfare is effectivly disrupting it.

"not reliabe" is a nice way of putting it, almost damm impossible is a better way of saying it. hence the work on ground and air based lasers systems.

Colin, they are still trying to develope interceptor missiles because the missile defense shield will only work against intercontinental missiles, those that fly high enough to penetrate the radiation. They still need to figure out what to do about more localized atttacks from a submarine, perhaps. Like you say, there is not much dialog on the subject.

Missile defense and Star Wars has been a billion dollar boon doggle robbed from the US taxpayer and a baby of that war criminal Reagan, it is a cold war relic and only admired by the most insane and empty
headed hawks in the current regime. Why would any country use nukes on the US, no country would dare risk this, we have enough nukes on the planet to kill it 300 times over yet some hawks just never know when to quit. Not only does it rob from the public purse by the billions, it doesn't work and has no bang for the buck, for Gods sake they attached a tracker to their own missile and couldn't shoot it down. This is just another Acton that violates world treaties and makes the states more reviled around the
globe, people can put on the spin cycle all they want but China and Russia know what missile defense is all about and will just increase the proliferation of better and more deadly weapons. Could Missile defense have
stopped 911, how about the Oklahoma city bomber, how about the Washington sniper. How about someone who sneaks a dirty bomb into the country. Missile defense is just a treat and cash cow for republican friendly
defense contractors and Canada is right o reject it, we lose international respect joining these silly games.

Would the money be better invested on US troops in Iraq so they get better equipment, how about using the money to help families of dead soldiers, how about using the money for real security issues in the US.

And Colin it was not Martin that rejected missile defense it was over 80% of Canadians, that's a hard concept for conservatives to understand, citizens democracy.

Lets take a second to remember the 5 more dead soldiers in Iraq today and the 100's of Iraq citizens who suffer
for chicken hawk draft dodgers like BUSH and Cheney

Stuart
Martin actually care about what we think? I think not. Martin only cares about being re-elected. Ask those 80% about the missile shield and I bet 90% could not tell one thing about it. I think Martin was a fool on how he dealt with this and now we pay the price in trade disputes. They could have sent a few officers as observers and stated their concerns about the system, but that wouldn’t make Martin look good and that what it’s all about. Martin’s anti-US stance is all hot air and foot stamping with little real result.

Personally I agree that the shield as proposed by the various US governments would fail. But I do suspect that within 20 years the ability to deal with a small number of missiles will exist. The main threat would be North Korea, as their leader is looney enough to do something like this. I also agree that the threat of a smuggled bomb is far greater.

I also have absolutely no trust in the international space treaties, as I think China, India and Russia will or have already, break them when it suits them.

It is the U.S. who have been breaking treaties lately.

How long can the americans continue to pay for thier military racking up the debt the way they are? At the same time they are letting their infrastructure decline where now it will take over 3 trillion dollars to re-build.

If they are so worried about China perhaps they should stop borrowing money from them and giving tax breaks to american corporations who move production there.

I am ready for you Colin, you seen like a well informed guy about Military issues, but the problem is you like most are only being informed on one side of the issue.

Your right about Martin, he acts on the polls and follows them well. Sure he only cares about being re elected, this is a huge victory, he was forced to follow the public will, this is what we should do on a number of issues, once the people lead the leaders will follow, our country would be much better if we made more stands and participated more in what's happening, and not just hope for a better dictator every 5 yrs.

I hear this allot in the media, sorry I don't buy blood money, I am not willing to break international law to curry favor for trade issues, are we a country or a banana republic, about time we stand up and set our own agenda and policies, we supply over 30% of the US energy supply, maybe we should use leverage also. A partner respects ones that don't cower.

Oh come on, this is Fox news talking not you Colin, turn off that crap and think clearly, sorry to insult but come on really, what would happen to North Korea if it launched an attack against the US, in that sense any nation.

In the case it's the US provoking the entire situation, they would love a war just to destabilize the area and set China back, this region would have made peace long ago if the US would back off.

How do you expect North Korea to act after the US thumbed its nose at the UN in Iraq, even after all the inspectors they still attacked. How do think the US would act if they had 40,000 plus troops and equipment on their border practicing war games and strategies for attack. Like I said before the missile defense is money in the toilet courtesy of the US taxpayer.

I think Canada should protect its resources and water by building thousancds of nukes. The NPT is a total failure because the countries with nukes never lived up to their part, getting rid of them. They only like the part where other countries don't build them.

True Frank but I just want this insanity to stop.

We have enough to kill us 300 times over, plus its the hawkish paranoid military types that determine when to pull the switch, very scary and unstable, I wonder how many times Reagan almost did us all in with Stupid comments or threats.

Just look above for example Colin says

I also have absolutely no trust in the international space treaties, as I think China, India and Russia will or have already, break them when it suits them.

Do you see how one scared or paranoid individual could create harm. For example Pakistan as reported last summer test launched another nuke without telling India, imagine if India misinterprets this as an attack. We must
move to replace these dangerous hawkish types from office.

Stuart, are you not familiar with one of the greatest US Presidents ever, Ronald Reagan, who took down the entire Soviet Union without firing a shot.
The Star Wars missile defense system was only a ploy, but did it ever work.
I urge you to view the 3 hour biography of this hero that's floating around PBS now.
What a great man.

As a side note, did you see Harper today, priceless and predictable. His true colors as a reactionary conservative are coming out, tougher and dumber on crime, 5 yr min sentences for any gun offense, yep that's really going to work, people who commit violent crimes with guns are usually not rational people who think about consequences, in the states most death penalty states have the highest murder rates and if giving out hard time stopped crime the US would be the safest place on earth. So our tax dollars
are going to be building new penitentiary's across the nation. Improving the conditions of the poor and hopeless nope, must appeal to that hard core base ( the fundamentalist and scared tough on crime crowd)

The fact you love the man Ronnie just reinforces my argument, a guy like you who advocated the nuking of Iraq is a pure believer in folks like Reagan and his ilk

http://www.highstrangeness.tv/articles/reagan.php

Just some memories of your hero , Ronnie, your such a sad little man. A true neo fascist.

Seems like your other Hero Sharon is about to check out to, him and Reagan can share stories of the good old days of killing peasants and raping women.

Oh man, I laughed so hard I thought I was going to pee.

With millions of others, I was involved in the fight against the Soviets for 45 years, so I know from the inside what went on.

The USSR wasn't brought down by US power, or because "the people voted for capitalism over communism", the usual PR propaganda crap. In fact the majority of the citizens still haven't reached their former living standards under the Soviets.

The USSR was brought down by its own corruption, government based on propaganda, lies. The system collapsed when people simply lost faith, got fed up and turned their backs.

The same fate could easily happen to our present neocon, capitalist system, causing poverty and destruction all over the globe, while filling the pockets of the same self appointed ruling class that comes up under every regime.

Some of the former big time communists are now the "enterpreneur" capitalists, with yachts and villas on the Mediterranian. Predators will always manage to swim to the top of the sewage tank.

Reagan was elected twice on the basis of "sound fiscal management and balanced budgets" and raked up more debts than all former US Presidents put together, a record now beaten many times over by Harper's idol Dubya Bush, the debt now standing at $8.3 trillion, which means 8,300 billion. This is where Harper and Martin want to "deep integrate".

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

jeez ronnie where do you get your facts, I used to call you an american because talk like one!

Fiat, don't you know the Soviet's didn't know they were toast ?
And, yes we could face the same fate.
But it's not on the front burner right now.
Right now the main task is to make more money than our enemies.
I tire at actually trying to debate you, but that's what it takes if you want to put your point across.
Ronald Reagan , was exasperating in his will to persuade. At the age of 75 ?
I'm much younger than that and I have a struggle to do the mental gymnastics to achieve what he did.
His job was CEO of the USA, and without firing a shot, he took down the entire USSR.
It cost a lot of money, yes, but the US is still in business.
The myth that the US is struggling now because of the war is false.
Look at the books now.

lots of typical stuey-boy idiot bullshite on this thread with endorsements from frank the moron. where's allan the third stooge guys? some of you ideologues would be best to refrain from commenting on that which you know nothing about. check your facts stuey-boy. reagan was a very significant force in ending the cold war, along with thousands of others of course, including lech walensa, pope john paul and gorbachev and his notions of glasnost and perestroika.

This is just to let those political junkies out there know that the Election Prediction web site is now operating. Here is the link:
http://www.electionprediction.org/2005_fed/index.html

The webmasters there review each post for any personal abusive language towards any parties or overly partisan comments.
Good luck with your predictions!

I wanted to jump back up to some up to Coyote's response to me telling him the conservatives aren't fascists. His response was to go into a rant about corporatism.
------
And as a disclaimer, I personally can't support the theocon and social conservative agenda, so I won't be supporting Harper this time around, so no use calling me an apologist. I don't like Burkean thought. Also, while a libertarian, I think tax cuts are political gimmicks and economic redistribution maximizes our economy, but large government doesn't. And debt reduction is the #1 priority)
-------

http://www.ccicinc.org/politicalaffairs/060103.html

This article contains everything you want to know about Stephen Harper, in his own words as he talks about uniting fiscal and social conservatives and his opposition to the new left.

Corporatism is more evident in the Liberal Party agenda than the Conservative Party of today. The PC of Mulrooney had very much a corporatist agenda, but its rejection comes from the reform party. Which says no the corporate welfare. I don't think Harper would have pushed for p3s the way Campbell did in BC. Harper has always been against shelling out grants to companies and tax free loans as well as regional diversification financing. Corporatism implies a close integration between government and corporations, rather than a pure laissez-faire libertarian belief.

Also, I don't believe the Harper conservatives are really on par with the Bush Republicans in economic considerations. While their social agenda may be the same, the American system is vastly different in the pure influence of corporations. Federal parties in Canada spend about 10-15 million on an election. Individual senators in the states spend that alone! I believe Bush spent close to 300 million last time.

Also, while there raising the patriotism flag is always good for a few votes, Harper is not completely wrong when he talks about relations with the states. They are 10 times are size and our biggest trading partner. They are like the stupid bully in high school. You don't pick a fight with them for the sake of picking a fight with them. Sometimes you placate them and negotiate with them. Its seperate from selling our your sovereignty. I mean the whole missile shield things is a giant waste of money, but if they want to waste their money..well, its a matter of picking you battles wisely. I mean its one thing to cheer for the Finns in the bronze metal game, its another to risk your jobs in the forest or other aspects of your economy,,

Stuart
I don’t take as an insult, and to be honest I don’t know what the Fox news says, because I don’t watch it.

I stand by my comments that the “Great Leader” would be capable of flinging a nuke towards the US, although I think Japan is more likely from a technology point of view (they proved that with the missile launch last year)

This nutbar kidnapped a famous movie director in order to make a movie and has caused the deaths of perhaps a million of his own people. He seems to already consider himself a god or similar. To be blunt I would rather Iran have nukes than North Korea.

I think China keeps him in power because he is s useful irritant to Japan, South Korea and the US. I am sure if they got wind of him planning to use a nuke that they would do their best to remove him and I am sure they have set up their own group within his power structure just in case.

It is a interesting case, the only reason the US has not bombed their Nuke program, is because of the North Korean army (I million strong) and the fact that Seoul is in artillery range.

As far as aggression goes, the NK routinely sends agents into the South, builds tunnels under the border, sends Subs and ships into South Korean waters and kidnaps citizens of other countries. Not to mention that they refuse any food aid that is marked with the country it comes from, despite the fact their people are starving.

Meanwhile the US has actually pulled it’s troops off the border, reducing troop levels and turned the border function over to SK.

As far as the money towards Missile defence, I agree most of it went into the toilet, but I think that money spent on a energy beam system is well spent.

The only reason that Saddam did anything with the UN is because of the US/UK armies breathing down his neck, had the US/UK military had pulled out, Saddam would have given the UN the boot the next day. I have read Hans Blixes reports, he only received full cooperation at the very last minute, as Saddam had thought that it would forestall the attack, but he read his cards wrong as usual. He was a cunning and astute dictator, but a bad tactician.

Pakistan and India, thought that having Nukes would give them the military edge, but in actually fact created a stalemate. India could absorb a nuke attack from Pakistan (but at a huge cost), but Pakistan would effectively cease to exist if India attacked. Therefore they fight a proxy war in Kashmir, similar to the cold war we fought with the USSR. Pakistan is a basket case, the central government doesn’t even have control of it’s own territory. I would like to see a moderate democratic government there, but I doubt it would survive long. Although Pakistan is in better shape than Bangladesh, which is the next big problem coming down the pike.

Elliot, every time you post I have to wonder if you have a brain in your head. Besides the childish name-calling and blind obedience to your party leader is your inability to construct a sentence or a paragraph, which makes your posts incoherent. Add to that the inability to ever back up anything you say with anything even approaching a fact and its no wonder you've forgotten your own password twice and have had three different handles on here.

sounds like you have far too much time on your hands frankie. you might want to try getting a life.

And you might try writing down your passwords assuming that's what happened and your previous identities weren't simply booted by the Tyee staff.

Fabian, thanks for the link.
It's interesting Lib + NDP = 99
Con + Bloc = 124
Looks like trouble doesn't it.

Colin!! You Heard that! Oh my, is anyone getting that down. You are a juggernaut of misinformation to say the best. You still think that the invasion of Iraq is about Saddam. You claim that the American allies in the invasion, Pakistan, is a basket case that can't control it's own territory. Yet Pakistan actually has nukes and has threatened to use them. What part of this riddle is it that you do not understand? The fact is Colin, despite all the money we can make producing terrifying weaponry, we are doomed if we don't start winding it down.

What will we all say when China invades North Korea ?
It's coming soon, just after Israel nukes the Iran nuclear facilities.

Eddy
Actually the US and Russia have disposed of large numbers of Nukes. Even if everyone promised to get rid of theirs, each nation would likely keep a few just in case the others lied, that is human nature. When I was in Germany we knew that if a war broke out there, tactical nukes would have been used likely in the first 4 days and I certainly would not be around writing this entry.
Liddel hart wrote an interesting essay on the subject in 1960, it makes good reading.

If Iraq is just about oil why not just buy from Saddam? He needed the money and Bill could have played a tune with him on the sax. Of course the US support of Israel is all about controlling the 3 functioning wells that they have.

Ron
China won’t invade North Korea, but will likely have chosen a successor to Kim just in case, they know he is a rabid dog, useful for now, but to be kept on a short lease so as not to disturb the inflow of hard currency.

Unlikely Israel would try to bomb Iran’s nuke facilities and if they did unlikely to succeed unless they have excellent human intel. Unlike Iraq, the Iranians have spread out their facilities and Iran is on the extreme range of the fighter bombers the Israeli’s have. Also unlikely that the US will allow them to overfly Iraq. Although most of the ME states would not be unhappy about Israel destroying the facilities (Persian and Arabs hate each other) none them would actively support such an operation.

'(Persian and Arabs hate each other)'
don't they both hate everyone?

Well not everybody, there is this Albanian sheepherder named Vas and…. (place smiley here)

The Persians and Arabs have been at it for a long time, the area of Iraq and Iran have had border issues/clashes all out war since at the 1600’s in fact the British were asked to resolve a border disputes back in 1821. But I would expect that the disputes/dislike go back as far as Alexander the Great at least.

No, Elliot,honey, they don't. Now, go back and play with your toys and don't interrupt those with something interesting to say.

are you sure about that blondie? care to expand?

Yes and no.

I'm a Liberal supporter (or maybe was a Liberal supporter) - but is John Kerry's campaign manager running the Liberal campaign?
"Standing up to Americans" is NOT a statement to use in a TV shot..... in my opinion...

Dear Ron Erwin,
Thanks for your message on the Election Prediction web site I mentioned earlier. Its a good site though the professional pollster may think its unscientific since it is partly based on one's opinions. But as Diefenbaker once said about polls: "Polls are for the dogs." They change day by day and are only snapshots in time. The real poll is on election day.

Just one note of caution: the editors there can and do edit out parts of messages which aren't targetted to a specific riding--as is their right. This has happened to me once. But, in the end its more fun to participate especially if you live or know certain ridings. Regards, Fabian from Surrey Newton

Sunday Jan. 8: Svend Robinson is losing in Vancouver Center.

A new poll gives Hedy Frye 41%, Svend 33%, and the Conservative candidate 19%.

The ring theft incident has apparently turned voters away from Svend: Many respondents cite it, or concerns about personal honesty, as reasons they are not choosing Svend. Lib scandals are hurting Frye less than Svend's ring is hurting him.

When he announced his candidacy, I thought he'd
win for sure against Frye who's had her own personal bouts of being ethically challenged,
not to mention her party's ethical lapses.
Maybe he should have run in Burnaby again where he developed strong loyalty from constituents
because he worked so hard on their behalf.

i guess people aren't quite as stupid as svend was hoping and they saw through his phoney act. hard to believe that your first theft is the $50k ring. on the other hand 41% support the idiot liar frye. we're doomed.

Polls are for strippers, remember the MSM predicting a conservative minority in 2004. Anyway I respect Colin for his well thought out posts even thou I disagree. Regarding Iraq,

Why we attacked

1) It was a threat to the US, this is obscene and laughable
2) It had WMD's, also a lie and very laughable.

If we look at post war Iraq we see companies like Halliburton and Bechtel getting huge unbidden contracts to rebuild . Iraq is the world's largest garage sale at this time.

Oh and Elliott, we love you, 3 words, Hooked on Phonics

luv yu two stuey-boy.