Let's keep to the battles that matter

Is it just me? I get tired of hearing rants like this against our political leaders.

I'm no great supporter of Steven Harper. I actually don't know what to think about him. If some of the worst dirt we can come up on the guy is that he changed references in a government document (that I didn't know existed) of "gender equity" to "equality for men and women" and "child soldier" to "children in armed conflict" ...well, I'm wondering if he's not that half bad. Heck, maybe I should vote for him.

Sorry. None of it gets me upset. He's caught in a system and I know that if any of the other parties came to power, I'd be reading the same indignant kind of tirade. It's just doesn't get me upset.

I admit there's some pretty dodgy stuff happening. Something's weird in the Kadr case...etc but there's just something in my gut that says we're not on target. I don't think getting rid of big, bad "Christian fundamentalist" (What was THAT all about...) Steve is going to go a long way to solving any significant problems in the country.

It's just like employees forever snarling and whining about the boss in the coffee shop. I've seen the biggest whiners get promoted and then watched as the perpetually dissatisfied employees turn and backbite their former ringleader. It's human nature and there's nothing here that's new under the sun.

I think the average joe gets tired of it all. We don't get out and vote because we've heard it all before. We need to go deeper than to just snipe at our elected leaders ad nauseum. Statements like "No other government in Canadian history (uh huh) has ever been so condescending" just read like empty cliches and I pretty well figure that there's something (probably personal) going on here that is hijacking the real issues.

Come on, Tyee. Come on Mr. Dobbin. Stick to the good stuff. Let's get out there and tell me something that gets me mad. We need it.

Truth and Courage in Journalism

For every fluff article coming out of BC's mainstream media (CanWestGlobal and the David Black weeklies), we can always count on the Tyee to deliver accurate, realistic assessments of our elites. Mr. Dobbin never fails to deliver. Harper is indeed one of the worst figures in public office Canada has likely ever experienced. Mulroney of course is a close runner up.

This is symptomatic of the West, where we've seen political power abdicate to corporate power, leaving a very significant vacuum in leadership. There have been similar times. The early 1930's in Europe, starring Germany and Italy, also had a series of weak leadership and strong financial monopolies. Very disturbing.

Can we avoid such a trend, and see a return to public, democratic rule? It's up to us to do so. We still have significant civil liberties to speak out. If we don't use them, be prepared to lose them.

Great article.

Dobbin is right. Many of us

Dobbin is right. Many of us also have to think of strategic voting next time. Last time, we had a weak NDP candidate in our constituency and the tory came within a whisker of winning; unless something major changes, I may find myself voting Liberal for the first time in my life (I'm 72). ugh.

Ummmmm.....

Despite all that, we need to take the opportunity to get rid of the most destructive and mean-spirited prime minister the country has ever had.

Worse than Borden? I think not. Borden had a mean streak a mile wide and hundreds of Canadians died in ordinary home-grown conflicts such as the General Strike and the conscription riots as a direct result of Borden's inflammatory rhetoric, never mind the thousands sent into the crushing-mill of the First World War.

Harper's mean streak is largely under wraps, and he's a seriously conflicted puppy with too many loyalties tugging him too many different ways to be an effective Darth Vader. He's no Prime Minister, to be sure, but he deserves less of the castigation Dobbin dishes out and more sympathy for being such an ineffective communicator and negotiator of the aspirations of ordinary Canadians, in a position that demands the very best Canada has to offer.

Canada's loss of the past three years has been the chance to do something effective and ground-breaking in so many different areas - human rights, energy efficiency, resource sufficiency, making business accountable, geopolitical strategy - it's a tragedy that we've had such a wimpy failure as Harper to "lead" us when he is so obviously unable to put together a coherent policy of any sort that can galvanize more than a fraction of his own supporters, never mind any significant minority of Canadians. He'd rather make press on the most minor of issues that have little import to nearly all Canadians, like making certain loser criminals serve longer sentences in already-overcrowded jails without doing one whit to alter the conditions that produce the criminals in the first place.

Our loss. But in the absence of a truly stellar performer (and I'm quite sure Iggy isn't it) the upheaval of yet another election will further project Canada into a maelstrom of uncertainty, rather than bringing forth honest dialogue about one or two issues that could galvanize Canadians to solve at least one major problem during the reign.

We as Canadians are not that far apart from each other in our goals and aspirations for how to run the country. But we've let a series of idiot prime ministers and a venal press dictate to us our contrary debating positions, and now there's no hope of consensus.

If you want to burn anyone at the stake, burn the Aspers, Ivan Fecan and perhaps Ken Thomson too. They've done more than anyone to ensure Canadians remain ineffective and set at each others' throats for the foreseeable future.

Does he eat babies like Gord?

You could be stuck in Bozutoostan Murray. Does he still have a hidden agenda? Will we have to kneel at some altar? Give me a break! Canada under Stephen Harper is doing much better than just about anywhere else by any measure.

"Canada rated world's soundest bank system: survey

CANBERRA (Reuters) - Canada has the world's soundest banking system, closely followed by Sweden, Luxembourg and Australia, a survey by the World Economic Forum has found as financial crisis and bank failures shake world markets.

But Britain, which once ranked in the top five, has slipped to 44th place behind El Salvador and Peru, after a 50 billion pound ($86.5 billion) pledge this week by the government to bolster bank balance sheets.

The United States, where some of Wall Street's biggest financial names have collapsed in recent weeks, rated only 40, just behind Germany at 39, and smaller states such as Barbados, Estonia and even Namibia, in southern Africa.

Canada continues to climb in global competitiveness, rising to ninth in the world in 2009, according to the study. "This is the second year that Canada has seen an improvement in its ranking. We moved up four rankings in two years -- only Singapore and Australia matched that achievement," said Jim Milway, executive director of the Institute for Competitiveness & Prosperity, the Canadian partner to the World Economic Forum. The ranking is based on three separate measures --including basic requirements (such as infrastructure), efficiency enhancers (education, market efficiency and technological readiness) and innovation factors (business sophistication and innovation)."

An excercise in futility

Iggy is the only possible replacement and he may well be a good spieler on his tv programmes but now in politics he's full of staged bluster and pragmatism to garner votes. What would he do? Veer left to try and steal some more support from the NDP? Say go after 25% of their vote and boost the Liberals ranks by 3.5% of the votes? That would place the Liberals about even with the Conservatives. No. He'll veer right to try and steal 25% of the conservative support because that's worth 8.5% of voters! That's where the Liberals need to regain strength, from the conservative base. Iggy's already been to Alberta and told them he sees the Oil Sands as a vital resource. So what can Jack expect to get? EI padding? Alberta complained about over-contributing to EI just this week, so that one's touchy.

Governments are usually elected out, not in, and the general population has yet to think that the conservatives have done anything bad. Look at the numbers. Iggy might be dreaming in panic-attack Technicolor and go off half-cocked, which could bring us back to him having that malignant narcissism you speak of Murray.

One night in Calgary...

That's all I can ever remember Zalm. It wasn't me. You are right though, Martin put the kibosh on the mergers and Barrett zipped off to London for a short stint. I believe that Martin did it to ensure branches not closing and to keep National and Desjardin from becoming tiny. It was, however in hindsight, good policy, Stevie hasn't changed it and we have the best in the world.

EI has been extended effectively immediately

And the poles are tied despite Harper doing his summer long campaigning in fear of Iggy's increasing popularity in the east. Good on Iggy and don't forget the Bloc it has lots to say and the NDP well rumor is Jack is just heating up for a fall election.

Harper's Hated "HST" is no winner as over 75 percent of the population feel it has got to go as cash strapped provinces premiers get billions for agreeing to the tax.
Its fifty ways to get rid of a premier to set yourself free from the hated HST, and throwing in the instigator is not a bad idea either. As one thing for certain Harper's not the only politician around here who has no use for the law's that are supposed to govern are land as Campbell is also a real close contender.

Harper, Iggy et al

Send them all packing. Vote independent as much as possible. We've got to get fresh blood into the House of Commons and the BC Legislature(when our chance comes there). The political parties have become stale and have lost touch with their constituents. When you vote for a party you get a leader with too much power and his flock of sheep, not to mention the unelected puppeteers in the background.

The parties have been using our institutions as their own personal playground for far too long and it is time to kick them out of the sandbox.

Today's revelation - the real Harper

The CBC's story today on the Haper speech to a meeting of his "friends" and excluding the media reveals the real Harper. This guy is as scary as a Reagon or Maggie Thatcher. Canada is better off without his kind and the sooner he is gone the better. I will vote for any federal party with the best chance of making sure he never gets a majority. He sounds like a U.S. Republican nutbar.

Harpo, Iggy, and what's his name.........

....... are not fit to be PM. Their political parties are packed with cronyism, corruption, despotism, sleaze, and more.

Canada is an international laughing stock and now is considered a benign autocracy, with very little democratic process left.

Canada under Stephan Harper...

...was the last to enter the global economic recession and is the first to exit it.

That says enough for me and any other Canadian who works for a living (I'd say the majority of us).

The Tories have my vote.

Ummm!

I hope all of Harper's fans heard the recording of his remarks at a 'secret' Sault Ste Mariemeeting with conservatives which was released by the CBC.

For anyone who claimed that Pee Wee had given up his secret hopes and desires to purge Canadian public life of malign 'leftists' when he gets his majority I'll expect an apology...

wow talk about distorting

so Iggy has a live press conference on newsworld but newsnet is running fluff totally ignoring the response to Harper's secret speech.

Regardless if you hate the Fed libs or not, this sort of severe distortion does not bode well for what will be presented to Cdns in the coming weeks.

Thanks to our miseducated

Thanks to our miseducated ecocomists and politicians on the take, any self sufficiency potential of Canada has been destroyed and we're living off from the sale of the country from under our feet.

When will our idiot leaders finally realize that a "resource based" economy, selling unprocessed resources, is not an "income", but economic suicide?

Canada is not coming out of this so called "recession", but going deeper and deeper into debt, under the control of and enslaved by our dear "foreign investors", thanks to politicians like Harper and Campbell.

Ed Deak.

Secret? Hardly.

Sep 10, 2009 04:30 AM

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has told his party's faithful he believes a majority government "is in reach" for his party the next time there's a federal election, CBC reports.

Harper's comments were reportedly made last week to Conservative supporters in Sault Ste. Marie at a meeting that was closed to the media. CBC's The National says Harper's speech was videotaped by a student in the audience and a copy of the address was sent to the Liberal party, which sent it to CBC.

In the video, Harper is seen saying "we need to win a majority in the next election campaign" or else the Liberals would govern in a coalition with the NDP and Bloc Québécois.

His comments come as a new poll shows Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's popularity has nosedived."

The Star

If there is a vote the only thing that will stop another historically low turnout will be those who vote against Iggy to teach him a lesson in patience.

great 1more Harper cronyism and distortion....

Harper names former Tory minister to head appeals court

http://www.canada.com/news/Harper+names+former+Tory+minister+head+appeals+court/1979619/story.html

Pee Wee also said a lot more than that...

He also talked about left-wing ideologues and left wing appointees to boards and courts - it was the same old, same old hidden agenda that Pee Wee has been stumping in private since he got his start with Preston Harper.

Nothing has changed - he and his amanuensis Tom Flanagan have a plan for Canada - always have had.

He and his offensive beliefs need to be shuffled off the stage forever

I don't want an election now - but, if there is one, I may well vote Liberal for the first time in my life.

Not that I have any illusions about Ignatieff, but Harper has to go.

He's a dictator, not a democrat; an ideologue, not a democrat; a narcissist, not a man of the people.

He has to go.

Every time he thinks the cameras aren't watching and the recorders are turned off he reveals exactly what he's all about.

It ain't pretty and it sure ain't Canadian. He’s an elitist and, in all likelihood, a racist too boot.

He hates openness; he hates debate and discussion; he hates real democracy and he, at bottom, hates Quebec…

If you are tired of elections...

...Harper was responsible for the last one and he violated his own legislation to call it. Devious as the whole action was. Now we know his true colours and spouting off to his party faithful as he did there is no longer any confusion about where he wants to go if he gets his way. It has nothing to do with what the people want. Suggesting now that we are coming out of a recession and Flaherty suggesting we'll have a balanced budget by 2015 is laughable. It's a wild guess. Suggesting that this is Harper's doing, HTC is downright silly.

Don't Think. Vote.

"One thing could get him re-elected: millions of Canadians deciding not to vote. Don't even think of being one of them."

The real message here I'm afraid is simply "don't think". Get out there and vote against Stephen Harper because otherwise the sky is falling (those who think it already has don't know what a real falling sky looks like).

Well, gosh I'm still confused. The ballot doesn't actually allow me to vote against a candidate. So Murray, help me on this. Who should I vote for. I don't want to think. You can do it for me. I know you can.

We accept incometants!

A thought occured to me the other day. Why is it that small countries the likes of Norway, Sweden, and Finland have small populations and their land mass is not all that great, yet they have heavy industry that produces quality products and have social systems that insure their citizens are cared for. We don't build an automobile here that we can call our own. We are always looking outside of our borders to make a deal and we get screwed every time. Sweden has 9 million citizens, Norway 4 million and Finland 5 million. British Columbia has 4.5 Million and a lot more in terms of resources and land mass than any of the above mentioned countries. If you look at Canada as a whole with roughly 40 Million compared to 18 million in Scandanavia it would seem that we as citizens are not getting good value from our resources as we are not very well represented by the people that rise to power in this country. Our laws should reflect how we as citizens believe that we should act and should apply to our leaders first and foremost. Therfore our laws should be created and changed only by the same democratic process. There should be a law that we should not be allowed to steal from our fellow citizens for our own personal gains as it seems aparant that there is no such law at present or maybe it doesn't apply to our leaders.

Wake Up Monk

Monk said: "Come on, Tyee. Come on Mr. Dobbin. Stick to the good stuff. Let's get out there and tell me something that gets me mad. We need it."

Although you have told us what doesn't get you mad, you leave no clues about what would get you off the couch and into a voting booth.

If you are indeed representative of the "average joe", then I can only say that the average joe doesn't think too deeply.

How can you fail to see the subtle but important shift that Harper is trying to force on Canada by changing seemingly innocuous words and phrases? Are you unfamiliar with the art and power of propaganda, or even of public relations? Do you not appreciate the influence of simple words on public opinion? Did you not follow the US election of Barack Obama?

How can you not be outraged by Canada's abandonment of our citizens in foreign countries? Are you really comfortable with the idea that a politician like Harper can pick and choose which Canadians to defend and which to throw off the back of the sleigh? Have you not thought about the famous quote that begins, "First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist."

Why aren't you furious that Harper trumpeted the importance of a fixed election date, and then violated his own law in a futile attempt to seize a majority? Why don't you get angry when a prime minister engages in a blatant, in-your-face attempt to cripple opposing parties by removing their funding, without warning?

I could go on and on, but my point is this: There have been ample opportunities for people to get angry with Stephen Harper on issues of significant importance to Canada. If you regard those issues as trivial, then it's clear that you don't understand what game he is playing and what the end result might be. Perhaps that IS indicative of the average joe ... and the futility of democracy.

Don't blame the media for failing to raise your blood pressure. Blame yourself for blithely ignoring what is happening around you.

It was the Reform Party of

It was the Reform Party of Harper that wanted to do away with the OAP and replace it with RRSPs.

I'm sure Stevie hasn't forgotten it and is just waiting for a majority handed to him by the ignorant voters: "Oh well, let's see what he can do to make us more competitive and wealthy !"

Ed Deak. .

Murray Dobbin So Wrong

Wow!

Left-Wing reactionary... only in BC but priceless!

Murray, you're so wrong; even though you made some good points, you poisoned your entire effort with your paranoia. Easy on the bud, Bud.

Coalition?

I hear a lot of election talk, yet nobody wants an election!

This is a minority government, and so it is still possible to have a vote of non-confidence and wind up with another party or parties having a go at it.

Seems a lot simpler than going to the polls again.

Monk:

Think this then:
Both Harper and Campbell ran on fiscally responsible government. Both have now abrogsted their avowed anethema of deficit spending (that is, after all, a "socialist" phenomena) and embraced same, announcing not only deficits, but extended deficits. And they use the excuse of a so-called "recession" to do this -- even though (as one poster here declared) Canada was the last into it and the first out -- as though it's actually over. But as Yogi Berra opined: "It ain't over till it's over."

And THAT means out of deficit spending and the accumulated deficit paid off. After all, both Campbell and Harper are "fiscally responsible" (event though one mught be tempted to ponder 'to whom').

Harper and Flaherty.... "Steady Hand on the Tiller"

After seeing Flats deficit update and the constantly shifting numbers (always getting worse for us), I am beginning to think that Harper and Flaherty are more more Mulroney-esque. The Conservative mantra seems to be more like: "Sneaky Hand in the Till"

Quite frankly, having just seen the re=runs of the "Just Visiting" attack ads, it seems that Harper et al have a lot less material to work with than what Iggy has. As G. West has mentioned before, a couple of clips of Harper calling Canada a second-tier socialist country would be a bit of a trump card.

Quite frankly again, I suspect that Harper actually does not have the stomach for an election. He will do a deal with Jack Layton and hope that things turn around in the spring (which they won't)

Gotta love Canadian politics.

200-page document sought

Both this article and a 2008 CBC bio of Stephen Harper claim there is a '200-page "guide" showing Conservative MPs how to thwart and otherwise frustrate the proceedings of Parliamentary Committees.' The CBC refers to it as 'alleged' and I haven't come up with any other reference to it using my friend Mr. Google.

Surely, someone must have it.

Not that I want to thwart or frustrate the proceedings of any legislative body. I'm just ever curious.

Anyone?

G West

quote:
"...I may well vote Liberal for the first time in my life.".

Remember what Naomi 'Shock Politics' Klein wrote a few months ago about the Liberals.

"They were elected on an economic stimulus platform in 1993, with a huge mandate. The Tories were wiped out in those historic elections. And then they caved to pressure from Bay Street, from the corporate media and from the right-wing think tanks in the face of the debt crisis. They turned around and broke their election promises when it came to NAFTA, when it came to job creation, and the famous 1995 Paul Martin budget came down which did so much damage to unemployment insurances (which makes it particularly interesting that a key piece of the agreement for the coalition is about strengthening unemployment insurance). So we need to have long memories about the Liberals, because they have done exactly what Harper has just done, in terms of using an economic crisis for a neo-liberal about turn."

alive

I think this is Harper's concumdrum, considering that he "warned" the faithful about a Liberal/NDP/Bloc coaliton, and not-so-vaguely alluded to it being a "socialist" golem.

But I ask (and especially ask R/Man), what's the difference between what Harper is doing and what any so-called "socialist" government is proposing:
http://www.timescolonist.com/business/Finance+Minister+reveals+billion+federal+budget+shortfall+Victoria+luncheon/1980476/story.html
Harper himself "warned" us against the "evils" of deficit spending. Guess that grin on Flaherty's face (see link) is really a smirk.

Nonsense

What nonsense Dobbin spouts! Of all the national political leaders, Harper is the only one that makes sense.

The global recession confused even the most learned economists and confounded all those by the rapid onslaught. Let us not forget that it was the NDP, the Liberals and that regional Quebec group the BQ that demanded government run a large deficit.

Dobbin seems to have a one track mind on politics; if the party in power is not based on the principals of communism, then it should not exist.

Dobbin and Hugo Chavez are like 'peas in the same pod'!

My vote goes to Harper.

Stephen Harper

Malignant narcissist! Thank you Murray. I have been struggling for years to define what is "off" about Stephen Harper - his fatal flaw. Malignant narcissist! Strong language but it fits perfectly. He is a very, very, dangerous man who is setting out to change the constitutional structure of our country one cunning, underhanded, sneaky move at a time.

MVL

Try googling this, MVL, for links containing references to it....

Google:

"200-page" "guide" "Parliamentary Committees"

"One cunning, underhanded, sneaky move at a time"

Well said, Susan McLoughlin.

Thank you Mr. Dobbin. Once

Thank you Mr. Dobbin. Once again you mirror my thoughts. Yes, Mr Harper is personality disordered. I think, though, we have to look at ourselves and ask why such leadership is being granted today. Why are the lack luster, the inept and the downright eerie able to gain these positions in Canada? What is going on? Why are we not able to attract the kind of leadership I see across the border, in some European countries, or in Quebec? I worry this problem is within the ruling parties and the government itself. I also blame shameful low levels of literacy in this country, but it is worse down south, and yet an intelligent and worthy leader managed to emerge there.

I also think, though, that "the virtuous human rights defending Canada" that is supposedly being lost had not been built on a solid foundation. How could it be given our abysmal treatment of the First Peoples of this land?

Still, an excellent article and representative the kind of journalism I admire.

Susan McLoughlin

I didn't realize that Stephen Harper or his government has tried to change anything in the constitution. Would you please give us an example.

So, there you have it

"The Liberal party will not agree to form a coalition," Ignatieff said flatly. "We do not support a coalition today or tomorrow."

The only possible alternative government is a Liberal one. I guess Iggy must now regret ever signing that thingy back last December; 'cause it might well come back and bite him.

This sure puts Jack out in the cold. As I said before, if Iggy is going anywhere he's turning right.

sd green - you spout nonsense!

Let us not forget as well that the ONLY party who swore it would never run deficts, is the Harper Conservtives. Deficits are a "socialist" measure, and are a sign of irresponsibile governance, regardless of the circumstances.

Yet the Cons are running deficits until 2013. Well, consider your vote cancelled, because I will NEVER vote for the Harper Con.

Oh, come on Rick

Everyone else was screaming for a whopping deficit and saying that Harper was wrong. So, he listened to that 'majority of Canadians', as we are often reminded, that didn't vote for him and he listened - and will now run a deficit. To complain now after Harper has done what the 'majority' wanted is just plain silly.

Didn't you mean it?

The majority of Canadians ...

... want Harper to step down as PM.

I won't complain if he listens to the majority of Canadians now.

Will you ?

Joe Clark's buddy

I'm sure he will if someone else obtains more ballots. Until then he will do his duty until he feels it's time to move on. In the meanwhile he'll listen to the people of the country and manage as he has been elected to do. Democratically and as Prime Minister.

Did anyone notice that this week Joe Comartin of the NDP said that Harper's appointment to the the supreme court was a good one and showed no political or ideological bias, in as much that the appointee is considered liberal, objective and maybe even progressive?

McCarthyism?

Everywhere I look I am hearing the terms left wing, socialist, seperatist, even communist as if these attitudes are not only immoral but illegal. The last time I looked, this is NOT The United States. The time is NOT 1950, and Joe McCarthy has been severely discredited.

I wish I didn't have to remind Canadians that espousing ideas that do not fit in with Stephen Harper's (or Campbell's) vision do not make a person a pariah on society.

Harper's hissy-fit

I think its time Harper and Ignatieff listened to the voters. If the voters elect a minority government, because they don't trust a single party to run the country, then that is should happen. They must work together, to make the government work, not fight with each other. If they can't do that and instead go into a name-calling hissy-fit, then they should resign since they are demonstrating they incapable of governing the country.

realistically, Harper lost all democratic credibility ...

... with the leak of the secret plan to disrupt Commons committees, breaking his own election law and then he prorogued Parliament to avoid the majority ballots in the House.

He's so mad to curry favour for power he even appointed a socialist as Ambassador.

He's massively expanded government spending deficits and debt-growth like a Keynsian and nationalized the means of auto production.

What's next ? Nationalizing the Banks ?

http://www.canadianmanufacturing.com/cmo/news/headline/article.jsp?content=20090127_190940_52264

Seems like Harper's secret agenda ... is socialism.

Sort of a lot like Lot's wife?.?....

Hmmmm! --- disappointing article for moi --- no mention of people looking at Harper and turning into pillars of salt.

Drat!

Kinda think more research for these types of articles are necessary --- scientific rumors abound ----- something to do with Harper, Conservatives --- lack of sunspots…….

And thank goodness for them there National Enquirer Mag articles too....

Jack is quite happy with Harper

...but Murray is now telling everyone to vote Liberal, "The NDP has learned nothing from the last two elections...". Hey Jack, that's gratitude, eh?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/layton-strikes-conciliatory-tone-amid-looming-showdown/article1285726/

harper's no trudeau

Let's face it: Dobbin's no psychologist and Harper's not Trudeau. Now there was a fella with issues. What did he say in October/70? When asked how far he'd be willing to go in suspending civil liberties, P.E.T. said: "just watch me."
I can't support Harper but then, thinking of voting for the Liberals makes me gag, not after The War Measures Act was invoked by a Liberal back then. Incarceration, for speaking your mind, yet.

There's an old saying: Better the devil you know. Now one thing about right wingers, god love them, you don't have to imagine what they're thinking or what opinions they might hold. M.I., on the other hand... I have no idea how he might govern, but I have concerns about his agenda. Even Lenin felt the right wing was preferable to liberalism, largely because of that distinction between them and I think he was wise in that regard.

Anyhow, bandying about labels like "malignant narcissism" is not helpful. While I have never voted for either of the two major parties, I find that this labelling is as much of a problem on the left as tyrannical narcissism is on the right. I think it is a function of politically correct thinking which passes for reason and ought to be seen for what it is, narcissistic rhetoric in its own right and perhaps malignant, as well.

Strategic voting: I'd have to take a lot of valium and a few stiff drinks to vote for any party I didn't believe in just to gain a hypothetical advantage. I plan on being sober, yet again, for the next election.

Harper

and his party (I won't sully the name or the principles of true Conservatives by calling them that) achieved minority status by drawing the largest number of votes in declining waves of enthusiasm, not by getting the approval of most of the Canadian electorate in total. Which says that the electoral system we have is no longer effective in being a true reflection of our desires.

Part of that failure is the result of political parties not presenting leaders who can inspire us, or presenting policies which cannot inspire us. But the main fault lies within us, the voters who do not inspire the leaders toward achievement with policies that reward us rather than the faceless eminences grises who stand behind the politicians pulling strings.

The problem's only solution then is for all the electorate, the entire voting public to actually make the effort to mark X on a ballot, no matter how often it has to be done. Ignoring the vote, or spoiling the ballot (supposedly to 'send a message') is only the way to allow another round of government to slip into power under the radar.

Perhaps no election should be declared "over" until at least 50% + 1 of registered voters have picked a winner.

Let's face it, the Liberal Party is the old Conservative Party..

...and the Conservative Party is Reform/Republican with a name co-opted to make itself more palatable.

Though I can't stand the Liberals anymore because they've been right of centre for at least fifteen years (underfunding health care, quietly promoting privatized health, selling off resources), Harper is so far beyond the pale I am reluctant to throw my support to any of the more left - if they can even be called that - parties lest he get in again.

My fear is that liberals will split their vote between the NDP and the Liberal Party, giving Shit Stain another minority.

des

Or, an MP's renumeration should be based on the percentage voter turnout. After all, the turnout is directly related to the eforts of the MPs in aggregate, and "working hard" is not the same as "working effectively":
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/307945
The average wage of a Canadina MP is about $155G's+

So, given a 59% turnout in the last election,
MP salaries should be trimmed to $91,500. The same hsould go for senior civil servants as well. Perhaps then, it would be in their intersts to encourage a turnout rather than discourage it.

RickW

You ask, "I ask what's the difference between what Harper is doing and what any so-called "socialist" government is proposing:"?

Very little. Would you prefer that the Conservatives limit themselves to strictly hard-core conservative policies; or do you concur that deficit spending during this recession is appropriate to maintain social services and create growth and jobs?