- 2 Nov 09 - Test

Howdie

- yada yada yada

It's me again

- Hi Everybody

It's me.

- I guess Alberta separating is one way to get rid of Harper and the Con's

Posted to: Climate change report 'irresponsible,' Prentice says, Bill Curry and Dawn Walton, Oct. 31, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/climate-change-report-irresponsible-prentice-says/article1344485/ Tab 61
and
Canada can meet its climate goals, but the West will write the cheques, Shawn McCarthy, Oct. 30, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-can-meet-climate-goals-but-the-west-will-pay/article1342887/ Tab 45


This report - Climate Leadership, Economic Prosperity: Final report on an economic study of greenhouse gas targets and policies for Canada, Pembina Institute and David Suzuki Foundation:

"Ottawa will have to lead a massive restructuring of the Canadian economy, with wealth flowing from the West to the rest of the country, if it is to meet its climate-change targets"
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-can-meet-climate-goals-but-the-west-will-pay/article1342887/

is based on implementing the Harper and the Con plan of reduction of greenhouse gases!

As far the Harper plan requiring a reduction in production of oil and gas, this is quite easy for anyone to predict. They are attempting to reach a certain goal which is set in absolute terms (20% reduction from 2006 by 2020). However, their plan is to reduce the amount of CO2 production in relative terms i.e. per barrel. Basically this report is saying that to reach the absolute goal as professed by Harper and the Con's themselves it will be required to also reduce the number of barrels produced. This is not rocket science.

Rather than approaching this report and this problem in an objection, rational fashion, Harper and the Con's are approaching Canadians, and especially Westerners on a purely emotional, irrational, basis, accusing the authors of bias, self serving and generally unethical behaviour. This is not surprising since Harper, Baird, and the Con's all think, and operate, only in these terms. How about Harper presenting a comprehensive, well thought out and factually supported plan for Canada playing its role in saving this planet for our children and our children's children. After all, that is what his job is supposed to be - not simply power grabbing and mongering and Canada, and the rest of the world, be damned.

The real problems is that Harper and the Con's have no real plan, nor do they intend to have any real plan. This '20-20 plan' of their coupled with CO2 sequestration (which, again, can be easily seen to be quite untenable for the tar sands) was thrown out there as a diversionary tactic when their backs were up against the environmental wall a couple of years ago. Harper simply has no intention of taking real and meaningful action on Green House gases, but to only stall and drag their feet, and the reason is simple. One need only look at the response from the West to this report. Some Con MP's are running around threatening separation by the West from Confederation based on this report. The Con buzz word out of Alberta is "divisive" an euphemism for 'separation'. Harper and the Con's power is centered in Alberta.

Again, this is not rocket science.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Someone should ask Harper, Baird, Clement, Aglukkaq and any other Con if they have received their flu shot yet. My guess is that, Harper has.

October 29, 2009 5:26 PM, 'Job sharing with Bob Rae', Jane Taber
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/job-sharing-with-bob-rae/article1344260/Tab 10

The H1N1 flu vaccine debacle is a prime example of the importance of who is running the government. Harper and the Con's have been so focused on spending tens of millions of dollars in advertizing to educate everyone on equating the stimulus spending with the Con Party. They should have been focusing on the H1N1 flu (Swine Flu) epidemic. This is just another example of Harper doing everything to grab and hold onto power and Canada be damned.

Bob Rae is right in pointing out that any death due to the Swine flu is a tragedy, especially if it could have been avoided, and we must take a very serious look at how it might have been prevented. Ignatieff and the Liberals have for weeks been pointing out the failures of the Con's in their handling of the whole matter. Even now, with the health of so many Canadians at issue the Con's response is simply to accuse the Liberals of partizan politics, which is, itself, partizan in the extreme. The fact is that no response to any crises is perfect and the idea in a democracy is that we rely on all the people to come forward, each according to their particular abilities. Harper and the Con's are essentially running the country as a totalitarian state and not a democracy.

How about, responding by saying something like "we are looking into these matters, and are continually doing everything we can to improve the way we are handling things and certainly any shortcomings anyone can point out are very welcome".

I have not heard a real explanation from Harper and the Cons as to why there is so much less vaccine available now that what they were saying a week ago. And this is important. Considering that the rumors are that they shipping these 'missing millions' of doses to the US, including for use in their military in Afghanistan, one would think they would be quick to clarify the matter. However, given Harper's general policy of obscuring and obstruction the truth and suppressing the facts, it is not surprising that we haven't got a clear explanation and probably won't get one from the Harper, Baird, Clement, Aglukkaq or any other Con, no matter how important it is.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

Mr. Flanagan, if you really want people to learn from history then you should point to the similarities between Harper and Machiavelli.

Tom Flanagan, Ignatieff needs a history lesson, Oct. 30, 2009,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/ignatieff-needs-a-history-lesson/article1344354/
Tab2

Tom,

I'm always quick to point out when you are wrong and so I feel compelled, albeit grudgingly, to say that you get high marks this time.

However, if you really want people to learn from history then you should, perhaps, point to the similarities in method between Harper and Machiavelli. You'd have gotten [sic] 'A+' for that.

"When I published Harper's Team , Mr. Harper was peeved I was putting out too much information". I always wondered about that. I guess I just assumed that it was some sinister plot to somehow ease the public to the right of the political spectrum and encourage Harper to cease his evil ways of grabbing and clutching onto power and Canada be Damned (another historical reference I feel is apropos) and return to his roots, which he has abandoned so freely.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Ignatieff and the Liberals are right.

October 29, 2009 7:57 AM, Bennett's swine politics, Norman Spector
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/bennetts-swine-politics/article1343255/ tab3

It is a question of the chickens coming home to roost. Harper and the Cons have been spending tens of millions of tax payers dollars trying to have the stimulus spending identified with the Con Party. They should have refrained from such partizan activities and focused our money on the H1N1 epidemic. The message on the Go Trains should have been early warning symptoms for H1N1 and what to do, instead of trying to make Toronto voters think that Harper and the Cons are their benefactors. It is not wonder people are upset and concerned. This is just another example of Harper doing everything to grab and hold onto power and Canada be damned.

Harper has poisoned the political environment in Canada to such a degree with his in-your-face, my-way-or-the-highway, sloughing off legitimate criticism with "that left wing incompetent", refusal to cooperate unless forced by the threat of losing power, that in order to have have an effect the Opposition must be very forceful. This is one of those situations.

Even now, with the health of so many Canadians at issue the Con's response is simply to accuse the Liberals of partizan politics, which is, itself, partizan in the extreme. The fact is that no response to any crises is perfect and the idea in a democracy is that we rely on all the people to come forward, each according to their particular abilities. Harper and the Con's are essentially running the country as a totalitarian state and not a democracy.

How about, responding by saying something like "we are looking into these matters, and are continually doing everything we can to improve the way we are handling things and certainly any shortcomings anyone can point out are very welcome".

Oh, and did I mention, Normal Spector is incredibly biased.


Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- It is time we got 'Tough on Con's' and give Harper the boot.

"Watchdog to cost out Tory crime agenda Liberals request financial analysis, hoping to determine implications of crime bills", Bill Curry, Globe and Mail, Oct. 27, 2009,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/budget-office-looks-to-put-price-tag-on-tories-tough-on-crime-agenda/article1337669/
tab21

"Harper and the Con's Once Again Stifle the Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page By Withhold Information for His Assessment of the Costs of the Conservative government's tough-on-crime agenda", will be the headlines in a week or two.

Harper and the Con's 'agenda' is no more than a hodgepodge of 'one-off's' that do not actually 'get tough' on anything but the tax-payers pocketbooks. In fact, Harper's changes are not much more than following George Bush's agenda, which has been manifestly demonstrated to be a complete disaster.

It is interesting that they refer to it as an 'agenda' and not a 'policy'. There is no coherent, unified policy here. These 'actions' are intended strictly to appeal to the extreme right elements in our society and upon which Harper and the Con's so strongly rely for support. Harper has no concern for how much it costs or the likelihood of it actually reducing crime. The worst part is that once again Harper is buying votes with the tax payers dollars.

As it turns out they have nothing to support their position to say that it is in the best interest of all Canadians. In fact, all the evidence points to the exact opposite. This is illustrated by the Report released by Graham Stewart, Prof Michael Jackson, et al, in last September.

The response by the Con’s, “The professor has a different philosophy than us,” Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan (to CBC).

In other words, the report is correct, Harper and the Cons are totally disregarding the facts and basing their position on shear Ideology, extreme right wing at that.

That is, they are not basing it on what is best for Canadians, but on irrational fear mongering and self-righteous hypocrisy, dragging us back to the Dark Ages with hints of the Inquisition. Is burning at the stake "cruel and unusual" for witches???

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Flaherty is full of non-sense.

Recession fight leads to deepening federal deficit, Corporate tax receipts plunge 79%, October 23, 2009
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2009/10/23/federal-deficit.htmltab 79

The things mentioned by Flarherty, "paying down debt in good times, maintaining a prudent financial system and reducing taxes" are referring to a time when Flarerty, Harper and the Cons were very emphatically stating there would be no deficit and as he calls it in "good times". To say now that they were prudently preparing for the recession is total bunk.

They were done not because they were the right thing to do but to buy votes (e.g., with reducing the GST 2 points, as has been revealed by the Con's). Reducing taxes is proving to be a disastrous thing to have done as can be seen from the "78.6 per cent plunge in corporate tax revenues" - a result that is totally predictable for a recession. It is worse because once taxes are reduce it is very difficult to increase them, which was part of the Harper strategy in reducing them in the first place.

The Harper spending, now and before the recession, represents huge increases and it simply is not "maintaining a prudent financial system". Paying down debt is generally something I agree with, especially when you have extra cash on hand. However, where the cost of borrowing is very low it is very questionable to totally eliminate the surplus by paying down debt, and certainly, it is far more prudent to reserve some for contingencies, e.g., economic downturn, which is one of the things that was on the books and they eliminated, or investing in Canada's future through various social programs, especially aimed at our youth. If they were preparing us for a recession that ought to have increased the financial buffers that were built in, but they totally eliminated them, and as I said simply to buy votes. This is not 'prudent financial'.

The only 'financial plan' Harper, Flaherty and the Con's have, other than converting our tax dollars into their own spending fund, is to do nothing and wait until the US and other Western economies start to pick up and drag us up with them, then take credit. It may be 'prudent' for them but disastrous for Canada and the future of our children.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Harper calling an election would be quite the Harperiavellianism,

Submitted but not posted???Travers: PM may be wise to force election, Storms brewing over Afghanistan, stimulus, James Travers, National Reporter, Oct 24 2009
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/stephenharper/article/715587--travers-pm-may-be-wise-to-force-election#article Tab 2

Harper calling an election would be quite the Harperiavellianism, given Harper, Baird and all the Con's mantra of "Canadians don't want an election" and an election would be a waste of taxpayers money and disrupt the 'fragile economic recovery'.

However, with Harper and the Con's it has always been, grab power, hide, distort and obstruct the truth, approach the voter on an emotional basis and Canada be damned, so I don't put it past him and the Con's at all.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- The Con's are not the Tories

Stimulus money driving Tory bus , Party’s byelection candidates focusing on delivering cash,
Heather Scoffield, The Canadian Press, Oct 24, 2009
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1149171.html

larkmack wrote: "Two things. The party lead by Mr Harper are not Tories."

He is absolutely correct. The Con's are not the Tories.

The Tories had a long history of participating in the building of a great nation, Canada, and could hold their heads up with pride. Harper and the Con's have no such history and are tearing it down.

Harper's only concern is power, grasping it and holding on to it, Canada be damned.

Also, I can't imagine anybody pointing to how Harper and the Con's conduct their affairs with pride. Their place in Canadian history will be quite the contrary.

One thing that the Con's and the Tories have in common is using taxpayer's money to buy votes. If I recall Brian Mulroney was a master at it, however much more sophisticated and subtle.

Will the voters see through this? This is a good opportunity to see. In by-elections the voting is not so much for the leader or the party but more based on the candidates and the issues. On the other hand, these ridings are considered to maintain the status quo (the NS riding going Con). So, by comparing the last election result with the upcoming one may give some insight into this.

Also, hopefully the other candidates are exposing the Con's for what they are.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Sorry, fly this by me again, why is Canada advertizing the Economic Action Plan

Tories spend $46,000 to turn GO Trains into rolling adsCash would be better spent on H1N1 campaign than on economic plan promotion, critics say, Richard J. Brennan, Ottawa Bureau, Oct 23 2009
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/714707--tories-ad-money-turns-rail-cars-into-rolling-billboards#articletab 3

Whether it's 34 million or 60 million, what Harper, Baird and the Con's should explain is just exactly why is it so important to advertize the Canada's Economic Action Plan at all.

It is very difficult to imagine anyone not aware of it and certainly no one in a position to apply for funds pursuant to it. Perhaps Baird thinks that the mayor of Toronto will see the train go by and say, "Oh, yah, lets apply".

Clearly, the message Harper and the Con's are selling is vote Harper, vote Con. So, in reality, they are converting the $55 billion deficit to the Con Party's use, which means every man, woman and child in Canada is contributing over $1,500 to the Con Party - sounds like an Elections Act violation.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- another 'Harperism' - appeal to people's emotions to explanation why it is not his fault, but, in actuality, total non-sense

Tories starve Toronto's red ridings, MP chargesLiberal and NDP areas get 38% less from big parks and rec fund, Bruce Campion-Smith
Ottawa bureau chief Published On Thu Oct 22 2009Tab 16

Harper is suggesting that it is ok for the MP to use these 'Con-Cheques' with the MP's signature on it, but not their Con logo. This is convenient since, Harper himself has signed such 'cheques'. And, it is ok since it is the MP's hard work that got the funds for the riding, they represent the government and they should be acknowledged for their efforts.

This is, of course, another 'Harperism' - appeal to people's emotions to explanation why it is not his fault, but, in actuality, total non-sense.

If this were really Harper's position, then why is it that the Harper government has not arranged for any of the Liberal ridging to have such ceremonies, such larger than life cheques, to have the Liberal MP's signatures on it. The same rational applies, if one wants to look at these things objectively ... doesn't it. This goes for NDP ridging and Block riding as well, of course. After all, stimulus funds have been going to these other riding, as Harper himself points, albeit to a much lesser extent than Con ridging.

And if the Con stimulus funds ceremonies are not politicized then you might expect that they would invite representatives from the other major parties to attend, participate, and even help hold up these 'Cheques'. What are the chances of these things happening - none. And this should raise an eyebrow for all Canadians. Basically, Harper and the Con's are identifying these funds with the Con Party, as if Canadians collectively donated 55 billion to Harper and the Con Party - or over $1,500 for every man, woman and child in Canada - and I though the limit was only $1,100.00

There is no doubt that Harper and the Con's have politicized the stimulus funding to the hilt. This is a very unique situation, given the economic crash, the fact that Harper is a minority government and given Harper and the Con's promises on transparency, integrity openness de-politicizing government spending which Canadians evidently bought into. They ought to have arranged to transfer the funds in an non-partizan fashion, as Ignatieff and the Liberals proposed right at the beginning. Harper simply ignored this.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Harper and the Con's corruption is now and it is time they were 'outed' and made to pay the price.

Finger pointing and allegation, Jane Taber, Tuesday, October 20, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/finger-pointing-and-allegation/article1331239/ tab 8

There is no doubt that Harper and the Con's have been making a very concerted, centrally orchestrated effort to have the benefits of the stimulus spending identified with the Con party. Harper and the Con's have developed the biggest propaganda machine seen in Western democracies in recent history that they have no hesitation in using no matter how reprehensible and morally and secularly dishonest. Approaching Canadians on an emotional level, with a total disregard for the truth is a basic strategy for Harper and the Con's.

Deflecting important questions and responding with insults, distortions, obscuring and obstructing and generally showing contempt for our Parliamentary system is another basic strategy that has been employed by Harper and the Con's since they got into power. Everyone in Canada should ask themselves why they feel the need to respond in this fashion, if not to hide the truth.

When are Harper and the Con's going to stop hiding behind the sponsorship scandal and stand up and take responsibility for their actions.

The sponsorship scandal is in the past and those responsible have paid the price.

Harper and the Con's corruption is now and it is time they were 'outed' and made to pay the price.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

***************
10/21/2009 12:47:02 PM

Llucas wrote (Tab 8): "'Approaching Canadians on an emotional level' is also how politics works. (See Myth of the Rational Voter)."

The actual title of the book is: "The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies"

One can only wonder why you might leave off the last part of the title "Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies"

and that is precisely the point. Harper and the Con's, as you obviously condone, base their approach on emotions. This approach by its very nature totally disregards the truth and requires dishonesty since honesty leads to the truth and basing your approach on the truth is diametrically opposite to basing it on emotions.

The problem, besides having a leader of our country that hides and distorts the truth per se, is that it does lead to 'Bad Policies'. The only solution is openness, truthfulness,transparency, freedom of information, rationality, etc.

This also highlights the difference between an ideological approach, especially when it is extreme and right wing, and pragmatic approach. In other words, this is precisely the difference between the conservative and liberal approach.

You suggest that many Liberals in high places have gotten away with theft. This is a prime example of approaching an issue on emotions - a rational approach would be to give names and instances or at least point to some reliable source (e.g. not John Baird).

Also, the point is that it is high time that Harper and the Con's stopped hiding behind the sponsorship scandal, stood up and took responsibility for their actions. The importance is that it is now and they are running the country, these hard economic times make it just that much more vital. The Liberal were held accountable and it was Paul Martin, as Prime Minster, that stood up and accepted responsibility and they paid the price. Now, its Harper's turn, that is, if he has the moral fiber.


Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com\comments.html

- one can only wonder why Harper is throwing over $300 million of Canadian tax payers' money at development of carbon sequestration in Alberta

Jeffrey Simpson, On a cost basis, carbon-capture projects are madness, Last updated on Tuesday, Oct. 20, 2009 8:48AM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/on-a-cost-basis-carbon-capture-projects-are-madness/article1329825/ tab 6

Jeffrey, you get high marks for your analysis.

It is great to see people taking a rational, factual approach to these issues. We certainly can't turn to Harper and the Con's for this as they present everything on emotional, fear mongering basis.

Harper keeps saying that he will follow the US approach to global warming. In the US carbon sequestration may make sense only because such a large part of their energy is derived from coal burning. In Canada it isn't. To follow the US on this is, in a word, wrong. Also, given that research and development in the US is so much greater than Canada' it is hard to see Canada being able to compete with the US in development in carbon sequestration technology. This is especially true given Harper's attack on funding for the sciences in Canada, whereas, if I recall correctly, Obama is going the exact opposite direction with their stimulus funding. Further, the tar sands represent a much bigger problem as far as carbon pollution is concerned and carbon sequestration is so much more difficult as to make it not only insanely costly but simply unfeasible.

Harper's strategy on using carbon sequestration is a carry over from the Bush era. Harper trashed Kyoto and was cornered into coming up with some kind of plan to reduce carbon emissions. He followed Bush's approach that science and technology will solve the problem, at some vague point in the future. Pushed further Harper came up with his carbon sequestration plans. He had no rational, factual underpinning for this policy, it was all strictly political.

Given Harper's power base is in Alberta one can only wonder why he would throw over $300 million of Canadian tax payers' money at development of carbon sequestration in Alberta.

Being presented with the realities of carbon sequestration I wonder how Canadians would really feel about this.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Breaking News: Con's deny interfering in Champlain Bridge contract, according to Transport Minister John Baird

Tories deny interfering in Champlain Bridge contract, Mike De Souza and David Akin, Canwest News ServiceOctober 18, 2009
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Tories+deny+interfering+Champlain+Bridge+contract/2121100/story.html tab1


Well we have it from Mr. Baird, "No minister or minister's office had any involvement in this matter".
We can all rest easier now.

And, John Baird complaining about a "smear campaign" - am I reading that right???

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- When are Harper and the Con's going to stop hiding behind the sponsorship scandal and stand up and take responsibility for their actions.

Monday, October 19, 2009 9:11 AM, Don't call the Copps, Norman Spector
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/dont-call-the-copps/article1329025/
Tab8
Every time Harper and the Cons get caught red handed, they scream 'sponsorship scandal" - as if, everyone in Canada should say, "Oh my God, the sponsorship scandal, I guess what Harper and all his Minister's and other party members are doing must be ok".

If I recall, it was Harper's outrage and promise to do things properly, openly and transparently that got him into power. Well, now that he is in power, Harper is not, in reality, doing things properly or openly or transparently. This is a scandal and given his previous position and promises, hypocritical in the extreme and dishonest in and of itself.

Besides, Harper and the Con's , should not be so modest, they are quite capable of creating their own scandal as Sheila Copps is suggesting.

PS: the link to the Chantal Hébert article only has the front page indicating only that Kelly contacted Anderson's office and they were eager to to help. We are unable to confirm, from this, the rest of the story as relayed by Mr. Spector. However, it strikes me as odd that this is the first time I have heard of this allegation and perhaps, Norman, this is not much more than writers trying to sell their wares.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Just how much more of this abuse of power are Harper and the Con's hiding.

Optics of Conservative cheque scheme dodgy, By Sheila Copps, October 19, 2009
http://www.thehilltimes.ca/page/view/copps_corner-10-19-2009 tab1


Great article, Sheila, informative, to the point and newsworthy - keep up the great work.

Hopefully, everyone in Canada will start to pay attention to what Harper and the Con's are doing. Of course, stimulus spending and the deficit are not the only areas of Harper's government that we must be very concern about - for example, the environment, Afghanistan, obstructing and obscuring access to information, our Parliamentary institutions and oversights and, generally, their 'Canada be damned' approach to all they do as long as it helps them to grab and hold onto power.

Just how much more of this abuse of power are Harper and the Con's hiding.

It is no wonder that they want to suppress any type of access to information and Parliamentary oversight. Since, then Canadians will know just exactly what Harper and the Con's are doing.

Lloyd McIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- How much more of Harper and the Con's do we have to take before they get the boot.

Tory Senator on payroll of company that won contract
Jennifer Ditchburn, Ottawa — The Canadian Press Published on Sunday, Oct. 18, 2009http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-senator-on-payroll-of-company-that-won-contract/article1328339/
Tab 6

This is just one more outrageous straw on the camels back.

How much more of this kind of thing are Harper and the Con's hiding.

How much more of blatant favouritism to Conservative riding and Con supporters and Con's treating taxpayer's money as if it were their own is there.

How much more of Harper and the Con's do we have to take before they get the boot.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- The Harper strategy to eliminate the deficit is to wait until the economy grows out of it in 5 - 6 years. God save Canada.

Posted: 9:45am, 18 Oct.'09 (PDT)2008 federal deficit hit $5.8B, audit reveals, Friday, October 16, 2009
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2009/10/16/ottawa-federal-deficit.html#socialcomments tab 42


Harper, Flaherty and the Con's been hiding the truth, misrepresenting the realities, suppressing access to information and undermining Parliamentary overview and doing so for their own purpose of holding onto power and Canada be damned. The cuts to GST are a prime example that ought to raise the eyebrow of every Canadian, especially when we see the negative impact on the countries finances.

The Harper strategy to eliminate the deficit is to wait until the economy grows out of it in 5 - 6 years. God save Canada.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Best to give Harper the boot now

Wrong on the right, Since the Conservatives have morphed, maybe Canada needs a new party, By MICHAEL DEN TANDT,16th October 2009
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/michael_dentandt/2009/10/16/11420341-sun.html#/comment/columnists/michael_dentandt/2009/10/16/pf-11420341.html
tab3

Harper is only interested in obtaining and maintaining power and Canada be damned.

He approaches the people in Canada on an emotional, fear mongering basis. The reduction in GST by 2 points is a prime example and it is in the open that Harper did this knowing that virtually all thy economists in Canada said it was the wrong thing to do.

His strategy for the economy is to do nothing and it will grow itself out of deficit, in 5 to 6 years - wow, what a great excuse to keep Harper in power, we wouldn't want to disrupt they recovery plan. This is like someone max'g his credit cards out on the basis that sometime in the future he will get a higher paying job and pay them off.

It is time that we put some rationality into the way the country is run and it certainly isn't with Harper at the helm.

Micheal, you suggest that if interest rates increase in the US their resulting downturn will hurt us. However, we must all keep in mind that if interest rates start to increase in other countries then Canada will be forced to do the same. This applies not just to the deficit but to the debt which is almost 10 times larger. The deficit may well balloon out of site then. This is not such a far out scenario and in fact we say the markets acting on this interest domino effect theory and week or so ago.

Best to give Harper the boot now.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Canadians need a White Knight to slay this evil of Obstructing and Obscuring Access to Information by Harper and the Con's.

Ottawa won't budge on secrecy laws, October 16, 2009, Bruce Campion-Smith
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/711158--ottawa-chooses-secrecy tab 5


This is just another example in a long list of Harper and the Con's actions in obstructing and obscuring information. We see this, once again, with the Commission on Torture of Afghan prisoners. A lawyer for the Commission explains "If the government co-operates with a body established by Parliament within its mandate and gives the commission documents and access to witnesses then Canadians will know what happened". This goes right to the heart of the matter - that is, if there is access to information Canadians will know what's going on and Harper and the Con's simply do not want this.

Harper and the Con’s since being elected have taken steps, systematically, to marginalize Parliament, the Senate, access to information, transparency, openness and certainly have their sights on such other fundamental institutions and protectors of our democratic rights as the Supreme Court of Canada and the Judiciary, itself. The manifest purpose is to implement an agenda for which they simply do not want Canadians to be made aware of.

Liberal and comprehensive rights to access information, available to all, unobstructed and vigilantly exercised, is a cornerstone of modern, open and free, democracy, protecting all from a closed, secretive government intent on using the powers entrusted to them for their self interest and interests contrary to the will of the people.

The open, transparent, free and unobstructed flow of information ought to be enshrined in our Charter of Rights. Its obstruction and obscuration, and in the extreme, by Harper and the Con’s shows us the dire need for this.

"How can you cast your vote intelligently if you don't know what's going on?"
(Robert Marleau, information commissioner).

Liberal and comprehensive rights to access information, available to all, unobstructed and vigilantly exercised, is a cornerstone of modern, open and free, democracy, protecting all from a closed, secretive government intent on using the powers entrusted to them for their self interest and interests contrary to the will of the people.

Access to information affords the stuff whereby the individual may forge both sword and shield to uphold human rights, without which no amount legislation can guaranty these rights and so, should therefore stand on the same footing.


Many people criticize the media for not reporting fairly and accurately.
When information is obscured and perverted at the source by the government, such is what is happening now by Harper and the Con’s, this criticism is not merely blaming the messenger – since the media could make this a “cause de celebre”.

When the free flow is obstructed and curtailed it gives the government a leverage to gain influence in the media, by favouring one media outlet over another. The media is also to blame as well for this but then, they’re only human - aren’t they?

Harper and the Con’s have built, and employ ‘liberally’, a propaganda machine the likes of which Western democracies have not seen in recent times. They consider it ‘Educating the Public to Conservative Values’ (compare Harper’s statement at the beginning of the last election).

Like any propaganda machine ‘obscuration and obstruction’ of access to the truth is fundamental. Harper and the Con’s deliberate and extensive restricting and obstructing access to information is well documented. So to are his, and their, hiding and distorting the truth; responding to serious, reasonable and legitimate questions with personal attacks and slurs; and, their dark-ages attitude to Science and Scientific research.

I think education is vital but we must make sure that what people are applying it to is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that they have free, undistorted and unobstructed access to it.



Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Rock On Iggy - It is about time someone stood up and fought Harper and the Con's for the good of all Canadians, for the present and for our future

Liberals won't shift from green in next election, Campbell Clark and John Ibbitson, Oct. 14, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/liberals-wont-shift-from-green-in-next-election/article1322673/Tab 3

As with the economy and other things, Harper and the Con's strategy regarding the environment is to do nothing, let the chips fall where they may, laissez-faire, sink-or-swim, hide the realities through obstruction and obscuration, distortion and out-right deception and approaching the people on an emotional, fear mongering, irrational basis.

Doing nothing is a fundamental aspect of Harper and the Con's extreme right wing ideology. The obstruction, deception, distortion of the realities is Harper's MO. In combination with doing it for his, and their, own political benefits and Canada be damned is based on the Con's being a new party without the pride and long history of contributing to the building of our nation.

Harper waiting for the US is an excuse and one that can only put us behind and on the receiving side of an benefits that may be derived from the development of a green economy. Harper and the Con's are treating the stimulus money with its ensuing huge deficits that our children and our children's children will be paying for well into the future as if it were theirs and was coming from them and the Con Party.
Their purpose in spending it is solely to promote Harper and the Con's, to buy votes.

This is so pervasive and blatant, one might wonder at what point it would be a violation of the Elections Act - e.g. the max contribution to a party is approx. $1,100, the current Con estimate of the deficit is $55 billion, $1,700 per every man, women and child in Canada. Thus, the Con's treating this as their money amounts to a contribution of $1,700 per every man, women and child in Canada, well above the max contribution to a Political Party allowed by the Elections Act.

It is about time someone stood up and fought Harper and the Con's for the good of all Canadians, for the present and for our future.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- All Harper and the Con's care about is power, obtaining it and maintaining it, Canada be damned.

submitted to: Toronto Star
Ottawa's $19 billion reversal of fortune
Les Whittington Ottawa Bureau, Published On Mon Oct 12 2009
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/federalbudget/article/708904--ottawa-s-19-billion-reversal-of-fortune#article tab3

It is in the open now that the reduction of GST by 2 points was done even though Harper knew at the time that it was hurtful to our economic well being. Harper did it for the sole reason of buying votes.

The reduction in taxes by Harper, Flaherty and the Con's was done precisely for the same reason. Anyone who thought about it rationally could easily predict that it was eliminating any form of a safety net for our economy. They did it precisely for the political impact. Not only could they say "we reduce taxes" but that it is very difficult for anyone to now say that, realistically, taxes may very well be raised to prevent leaving for future generations a debt burden that is so crippling that the economy collapses into third world oblivion. There only 'plan' Harper has is to wait 5 or 6 years and hope that the economy will grow so big that it, by itself, eliminates the deficit. That is something like someone max'ing out their credit cards and saying that they will pay it off when they get that new job with a big increase in salary. This is no way to run a country unless, of course, you don't care if you're running it into the ground. Their spending was, obviously, done for the same reasons, buy votes.

Harper and the Con's strategy is to approach the Canadian voter emotionally and they completely disregard the realities or any kind of rational approach. This of course explains why Harper suppresses and distorts information, especially about our economy as with our Parliamentary Budget Officer. If the true numbers came out on our economy and what Harper and the Con's are doing we all could see very quickly what is happening and, obviously, Harper does not want this.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Everyone in Canada should stand up and say, in a single voice, "Mr. Harper, tear down your wall"

Posted 11 Oct.'09
"Ottawa's reporting on stimulus spending gets poor grade from watchdog",
Steven Chase, Ottawa — From Saturday's Globe and Mail, Oct.10, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawas-reporting-on-stimulus-spending-gets-poor-grade-from-watchdog/article1319704/ Tab 13


posted 7 Oct.'09

John Ibbitson, "Ignatieff responds with 'patient hard work' ", Ottawa — From Wednesday's Globe and Mail Last updated on Wednesday, Oct. 07, 2009 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-fights-back-with-patient-hard-work/article1314645/Tab 18

Actually, Harper and the Con's muzzling the Parliamentary Budget Officer and slashing his budget is an outrageous affront to openness, transparency, freedom of information that is so fundamental to our Democracy. This is especially true in these economic hard times where the government finances is so important and everyone knowing just what the government is doing is so important.

There is no coincidence between Harper muzzling the Parliamentary Budget Officer and slashing his budget and the continual errors in the estimates on the deficit made by Harper, Flaherty and the Con's or on their delaying on actually spending the funds for the stimulus package or the general mishandling of our finances.

You would think that the Prime Minister of our country would do everything to encourage and allow the Parliamentary Budget Officer to do the best job possible.

Harper, Flaherty and the Con's say they are doing a great job with the country's finances and getting us through the recession and assisting all those who have lost jobs and will lose jobs in the upcoming months. If this is really true then you would think they would do everything possible to encourage and allow the Parliamentary Budget Officer to do the best job possible so everyone can plainly see this for themselves. The fact that they are doing the exact opposite speaks volumes about the kind of job Harper, Flaherty and the Cons are really doing - i.e., so bad they must hide it from the public

John Ibbitson suggests that politically this is madness.

Well everyone in Canada, to a person, should be mad about this. Everyone in Canada should stand up and say, in a single voice, "Mr. Harper, tear down your wall". And, it raises an eyebrow that the media is not joining in.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- one of the big factors that a lot reports on polls leave out is the % 'undecided

Women and Ignatieff: What went wrong? , Michael Valpy, From Tuesday's Globe and Mail Monday, Oct. 05, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/women-and-ignatieff-where-did-it-go-wrong/article1313172/ Tab 34

The Comments sound like what they used to say about Harper when he because leader of the Opposition.

Also, one of the big factors that a lot reports on polls leave out is the % 'undecided'.

This is very important in the current dynamics since the Con's have a "die-hard" core of support and they are very unlikely to change from 'decided' to 'undecided'. Further they are very likely to choose anything Con, simply because it is Con, over anything other than Con simply because it is other than Con (that's what 'die-hard' support means).

On the other hand reports that do show the amount of undecided indicate that in the past few months there has been a significant increase in the number of 'undecideds'.

In such circumstances, what that means is that where the 'decided pie' decreases, the % that are made up of Con supporters increases per-centage-wise (if that's a word). The indications are that this is a significant effect. However, unfortunately there is not enough information given in the report to determine to what extent we are seeing this effect as opposed to true shifts in voter preferences. In the last election 'Liberal' voters protested by not voting. It is suggested that we are seeing this phenomenon now in these Polls.

For example, one would expect a high level of 'undecided' (which translates into non-voting in an election) in young people with a gradual decrease in 'undecided' the older the group. For the 18 - 35 group, one might expect little change in the number who express support for one party or the other over time since the number of undecided is so large anyway and the 'decideds' are likely die-hard supporters for one or the other party. As the age group gets older the number of 'undecided' decreases, or another way of putting it, the number of 'decided' increases. So, if the trend is that 'decideds' turn to 'undecideds' you might expect that the total % of decided decreases and where one represents essentially all 'die-hards' that parties % support will seem to increase, since it becomes a larger part of the 'decided pie' and the other party % will decrease. So, the prediction is that as the age group gets older, the total supporting one party or the other decreases with time and the % of decided will increase to the Con's since the % of supporters of the Con's that are die-hards is so high.

Compare this to the trend in the results here:

For 18 - 35, the total for the Con's and the Liberals is lower than the other groups and has the smallest change in time: 59 - 61 (presumably constant within statistical variance)

For 35 - 49, he total for the Con's and the Liberals is in the middle compared to the other groups and the change is decreasing as expected and has the middling change in time: 66 - 58 (change being: -8, presumably statistically significant)

For 50+, the total for the Con's and the Liberals is in the highest compared to the other groups and the change is decreasing as expected and has the highest change in time: 76 - 70 (change being: - 6, that it is lower could be accounted for by statistical variance as well as how the age groups id broken up, but it does not refute the above hypothesis since if the error is +/- 3 it could be - 5 for age group 35 - 49 and -9 for age group 50+, of course it could go the other way as well.)

So, the "trend" could be no more than reflecting that the Con's have a core of die-hard supporters with little more and the Liberals have a core of die-hard supporters along with a large number who support the Liberals but refuse to vote when they don't like what they see. This suggests that the Liberals and Ignatieff make sure these soft supporters understand what they and he is all about. It also suggests that these soft supporters should reconsider their stance if they want to get rid of Harper and the Con's.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Harper is no Class Act.

Sunday, October 4, 2009 09:45 AM, Harper sings, Iggy dodges,
Norman Spector
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/harper-sings-iggy-dodges/article1311417/Tab 5
and
PM gets by with help from Yo-Yo Ma, Last Updated: Sunday, October 4, 2009
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/03/harper-piano.html#socialcomments-submit
tab 111 (n-o)

The only reason, manifestly, Harper is on stage playing, whether with Yo-Yo Ma or otherwise, is his position as Prime Minister.

This is clearly an abuse of power by Stephen Harper. If a leader wants to show support for the Arts the traditionally accepted, classy, method is they attend the show. Better, instead of severely cutting funds they increase funds.

By doing this Harper is again showing his contempt for the Arts by manipulating those in the Arts and using this performance in a blatant attempt to promote his brand of governance and the Con party: like somehow Harper must be a nice guy, or somehow right in his (extreme right wing) ideology, or somehow is right or good for the Arts or Canada generally, or that Canadians in general somehow agree with what he and his Con's stand for. On the other hand, perhaps it's the Arts that is manipulating Harper in that by letting him appear he, and his Con's, will somehow change their 'colour'. Harper may display other colours because of his minority government but deep down he is the same, extreme right wing ideologue, who has contempt for the Arts this will never change and, with a majority, he will have no hesitation in displaying his true colour.

I hope they sang "God save Canada" at the beginning of the evening.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- This is just another indication of the hidden Harper, Flaherity and the Con's "No-Action Plan"

Kevin Carmichael, Istanbul — Globe and Mail Update Last updated on Sunday, Oct. 04, 2009 09:50AM EDT, 'Jobless may need more help, Flaherty says'
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/jobless-may-need-more-help-flaherty-says/article1311403/Tab 6

“I think we have to keep watching and if there are persisting challenges with respect to employment, it might be necessary to do more,” Mr. Flaherty said.

Leadership is not waiting until the damage is done and then doing something only when forced to act by the Opposition.

This is just more of the Harper, Flaherty and Con's appraoch of:

deny, ignore, mislead, hide the facts, manipulate, attack critics instead of making sound proposals, propose everything then drag their feet so that in actuality they are maintaining their underlying ideological approach of "hands-off", "sink-or-swim", survival-of-the-strongest", "every-person-for-themselves".

Compare this with what Flaherty said the other day about the deficit - that Harper and the Cons would wait 5 - 6 years to see if the economy will grow itself out of deficit and if this deosn't happen then do some trimming of program spending (G&M). Other than their excuse for staying in power for 6 years - vis.: recovery of the economy not thwarted by Harper and the Con's getting booted out of office, how can this "no-action plan" approach possibly be good for Canada and all Canadians. It's like saying lets wait until Katrina hits New Orleans and see whether the retaining walls need bolstering. My response is "God save Canada"

Obviously Harper, Flaherty and the Con's are taking the approach that International factors and economic forces will pull Canada out of the recession - all Harper has to do is sit back, do nothing and take the credit.

Since Harper, Flaherty and the Con's want to sit back, do nothing and wait, better we just give them the boot.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- When is Harper, Flaherty and the Con's going to stand up and tell Canadians exactly what they are and what they stand for

Tab 10

Kevin Carmichael, Istanbul — Globe and Mail Update, Last updated on Saturday, Oct. 03, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/talk-on-economic-exit-strategies-dominates-imf-meetings/article1311037/

"...When that moment arrives, Mr. Flaherty said he is hopeful that economic growth will end the deficit within five or six years. If growth doesn't work on its own, Mr. Flaherty said he will trim program spending. ..."

Harper, Flaherty and the Con's exit strategy is the same as their 'entrance strategy' - deny, ignore, mislead, hide the facts, manipulate, attack critics instead of making sound proposals, propose everything then drag their feet so that in actuality they are maintaining their underlying ideological approach of "hands-off", "sink-or-swim", survival-of-the-strongest", "every-person-for-themselves".

Anyone get the explanation why Flaherty is saying the deficit will end in 5 - 6 years, other than an claim to stay in power that long - so that recovery is not thwarted.

Harper, Flaherty and the Con's are intending to wait until the economy grows itself out of deficit i.e., so that increases in tax revenues will cover the deficits. This is, of course, in line with their hands-off ideological approach. But, what possible justification do they have for being in Government if they are going to do nothing!

Oh, Flaherty says that if growth doesn't work on its own he will trim program spending. From what Harper and he are saying they are going to give it 5 - 6 years to see if it works. God save Canada.

By the way, you can be sure they are surreptitiously increasing taxes, without the decency to tell everyone exactly what they are doing.

When is Harper, Flaherty and the Con's going to stand up and tell Canadians exactly what they are and what they stand for - extreme right wing ideologues, who base their policies on some archaic capitalist philosophy that has been incompetent to the purposes of modern, complex, diverse, tolerant, Western democratic societies for over 100 years.

- Con'd Again

G&M "Team Tory, er, Team Canada " Steve Chase, OTTAWA — From Friday's Globe and Mail Last updated on Saturday, Oct. 03, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/team-tory-er-team-canada/article1309352/

...

"A prominent symbol on some of Canada's official Olympic team clothing - unveiled yesterday - bears a close resemblance to the federal Conservative Party logo.
There are minor differences, of course. But basically it's a variation on the same blue "C" with a red maple leaf inside it that Mr. Harper's party uses to identify itself.

Gary Lunn, Tory minister responsible for the Olympics, acknowledges "there's no question there's similarities," but said Ottawa had no hand in the symbol.
"There's no politicization of the Olympics."

Mr. Lunn said the design was handled exclusively by Hudson's Bay Co. in consultation with the Canadian Olympic Committee and a panel of athletes."


*****

Gary Lunn's explanation simply doesn't hold water for a number of reasons.

First, bias is something that ought not to occur but also ought not look like it is occurring. Harper and the Con's should have done the right thing and taken steps immediately to have this changed.

It is very difficult to believe that no one in the government knew about this before it was made public - Lunn saying that he personally didn't know is simply not good enough, obviously.

Third, there always the possibility that whomever it was that chose it chose it knowing that it resembled, and quite closely at that, the Con logo and did so for future favours. By turning a blind eye, Harper and the Con's indirectly, or possibly deliberately, encourage thing kind of thing. I am not suggesting that this actually is the case, but given the Harper approach of secretiveness, shrewdness, manipulativeness, etc.,what's a guy to think.

By the way, everyone knows that the Globe and Mail flagrantly and blindly supports the Harper government (and an election or two ago came out and proclaimed it explicitly).

The "Thumbs Down" icon at the bottom of each Comment (recommendDown.png) looks suspiciously like the Con logo - insideous!





PS - while we're on the topic of branding.

The Conservative Party is not the Progressive Conservative Party and ought not be referred to as "Tory".

Your title ought to be "Team Con, er, Team Canada" or "Con'd again!" or the like.

- Why Harper and the Con's Must Go

Power can not be wielded upon irrationalism, and where the base is emotionalism.

History has too many examples of what results. One need only turn to the Roman Republic, their emperors, daily spectacles and appeal to the people based on emotion (it was Tom Flanagan who brought this comparison between the Harper and the Con's approach to that of the politics in the Roman Republic). Our culture rejected this on moral grounds 2000 years ago. Our sciences struggled for 500 years to purge itself of this. Yet one of the most important aspects of our society, governance of this great nation, not only has not rid itself of this but I currently, with the Harper and the Con's government, in the throws of its grip. Our modern society not only does not discourage it, but the media with its never ended search for the sensational as opposed to the important, the emotional as opposed to the reasoned, distortion as opposed to truth, self-interest as opposed to the good of the people, creates fertile ground for it, encourages it and is vital in its propagation. Together they feed off each other and, if not curtailed, together they lay waist all.

Irrationalism by its very definition leads to error. Emotionalism by its very nature has no self restraint. If they sit at the seat of power, then there is no external restraint either and so they are let lose on society like the Hounds of Hell.

Irrationalism based on emotionalism requires that those that oppose are 'enemies' and so polarizes the otherwise homogeneous society into 'enemy camps'. Once again history is replete with examples of situations where these 'enemy camps' were themselves based on irrationalism, emotionally centred.

An open, free, tolerant, democratic society where information is freely, openly and undistortedly available to all, where the Rule of Law, founded on rationalism, prevails, is the basis of governance keeps these Hounds at bay.

- HST is in reality the Harper Sales Tax

G&M: B.C. Dispatch, Harper so far unscathed by HST blowback, David Parkins for The Globe and Mail, Friday, Oct. 02, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/harper-so-far-unscathed-by-hst-blowback/article1308907/
Tab 4

"Competitive pressure is expected to force business to pass on much of the tax savings over time."

This has echos of Brian Mulrouney's pitch when he brought in the GST - vis.: prices would go down since businesses would be compelled to pass on the savings from the elimination of the manufacturing tax.

That was a crock then and its a crock now.

- If everyone in Canada were to take a close look at Harper what he stands for and what he is doing, we all would lose confidence his governance.

G&M: How ‘Iffy' and the Liberals dropped the ball
Lawrence Martin, Wednesday, Sep. 30, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/how-iffy-and-the-liberals-dropped-the-ball/article1307580/


It is this article that is "Iffy" and the media that has, once again "Dropped the Ball".

The real question that everyone should be asking is just how much of this is 'simply' media hype.

The only thing "Iffy" here is the underlying motivations of the newspapers and other media as well as those that write for them.

After reading this article one wonders whether the writer really has something important to say or simply came up with a catchy Title and had to write something in order to use it.

It is time that the media stop sensationalizing everything at the expense of presenting the realities and what is best for Canada and all Canadians simply to promote their own careers and bottom lines of their bosses.

For example, what Ignatieff said in Sault Ste Marie is that he and the Liberal Party has no confidence in Harper and the Con's and will not support them. In their non-confidence speech he set out the reasons. Who can point to any media report of the Coderre affair that actually sets out all the circumstances surrounding, as opposed to jumping on something that makes a catchy phrase or sound bite.

The fact of the matter is the media doesn't care what the realities are, only that they may attract attention to themselves.

What makes the 'news' is unabashed spectacle and sensationalism, with no regard to the realities. It is designed precisely to be catchy, play on our emotions and makes no effort whatsoever to communicate with us on any kind of intelligent level with the intent to present reality and in the light of truth. No wonder we have a government in Harper and the Cons that operate in precisely the same fashion. If Harper and the Con's agenda were, in reality, based on other than extreme right wing ideology it might not be so scary.

If everyone in Canada were to take a close look at Harper, his Con's, what they stand for and what they are doing, we all would lose confidence in them and their governance. The media ought to be spending their efforts in allowing all Canadians to see clearly how our country is being run, as opposed to 'Piling on Iggy'. This is a fundamental and vital aspect of the sacred and social contract enshrined in freedom of the press and the special place we have placed the media in.

- Harper and the Con's Economic Quackery

excerpt posted to: GDP reaction, ‘There’s no spark in our economy, Wednesday, Sep. 30, 2009 11:53AM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/theres-no-spark-in-our-economy/article1306631/


So once again Harper and the Con's are saying steady as she goes, we know what we're doing, leave everything to us, our strategy is working, we have put Canada in a better position than the other world economies.

And once again, the realities, at the very least, do not support their position and, in fact, indicate the opposite.

Harper and the Con's can not be basing their plans and predictions on anything real since the realities dictate the opposite of what they are claiming.

It is very difficult to see that Harper and Flaherty would not know that the all the sectors, especially the utilities including oil and gas, where their power base is centred were down and the only one up was manufacturing. If they knew then they deliberately hid this information.

If they did not know then what are they doing "leading our country out of the recession".

And, if they did not know then how could they, in any honesty, say that things are stabilized and will improve with them at the helm.

Clearly, as with everything else, Harper and the Con's are not basing their policies on the realities but only upon their extreme right wing ideology.

What do we have to do to get the truth from Harper and his Con's. What is really happening with the stimulus money. What good does it do to approve an project that won't start for 6 - 8 -12 months or even years. What about the 100's of thousands of jobs that are going to be lost in the next 6 - 8 - 12 months. What about all those people whose EI has run out and will be running out in the next 6 - 8 - 12 months.

Best we get rid of Harper and the Cons.

Having an election this Fall may seem undesirable. But, any hurt is minimal compared to the disastrous effects likely of not so doing over the next year, especially to so many individuals and families - and that's what its all about. It is comparable to someone diagnosed with cancer. Denial does nothing but put off taking action. Following views that are ideologically based and not based in sound science and reality, in a word, Quackery, deceives us into thinking everything will be ok, and so not only delays taking real action but prevents us from facing our situation and taking real effective action, until it is too late.

- The Harper, extreme right wing, ideologically based, gov’t, weakens our society, disenfranchises the majority and creates unfairness and inequality.

The strength of Democracy lies in allowing each person, as an individual, to contribute their unique skills, experience and abilities to the good of the whole society. The fundamental principle that “everyone created equal” affords the underlying mechanism that allows each of us to make our contribution. The more diverse the society and the more open and transparent the processes, the broader the range of ideas, considerations, perception, depth of understanding and confidence in the solution and that is for the good of all.

Ideology runs contrary to this in that it pre-assuming that certain approaches and opinion are right, and so ought to be considered and other are wrong and oughtn’t to be considered (i.e , “I’m right, your wrong”). These approaches are based on considerations other than what the realities are and give credence to that part of the society that subscribes to the ideology and disenfranchises the remainder. The more diverse the society and the more extreme the ideology the smaller the group that have a say and the larger the remainder that don’t. In a word, the worse the solution and the less likely that it is for the good of all. No matter what it undermines the very strength of democracy, to say nothing of its inherent fairness and equality.

Apply this to Harper and the Cons.

Conclusion:

The Harper, extreme right wing, ideologically based, government, weakens our diverse, open, free society, disenfranchises the majority and creates unfairness and inequality.

- ‘Irrational Fear Mongering vs. rational, open debate’ - this is a fundamental wedge issue between Harper and his Cons and the Liberal Party.

posted to: study Critics say Harper's blueprint for revamping corrections policy disregards studied evidence, Bruce Cheadle, Ottawa — The Canadian Press Last updated on Thursday, Sep. 24, 2009 07:20PM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-prison-policy-wedge-politics-study/article1300457/


Harper and the Con’s have made “getting tough on Crime” one of their central policies.

However, as it turns out they have nothing to support their position to say that it is in the best interest of all Canadians. In fact, all the evidence points to the exact opposite. This is illustrated by the Report just released by Graham Stewart, Prof Michael Jackson, et al.

The response by the Con’s, “The professor has a different philosophy than us,” Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan (to CBC).

In other words, the report is correct, Harper and the Cons are totally disregarding the facts and basing their position on shear Ideology, extreme right wing at that.
That is, they are not basing it on what is best for Canadians, but on irrational fear mongering and self-righteous hypocrisy, dragging us back to the Dark Ages with hints of the Inquisition.

This was underlying the statement by Ian Brodie, Harper's former chief of staff, when he explained that

“Despite economic evidence to the contrary, in my view the GST cut worked … It worked in the sense that it helped us to win.”;

as well as, what Tom Flanagan, a former Harper adviser, said about the Harper attack ads on Ignatieff rebuilding the coalition after an election,

“It doesn't have to be true. It just has to be plausible and it strikes me as plausible.”

It is becoming more and more open that this is how Harper and the Con’s operate. No regard for what the realities are and what is in the best interest of all Canadians given those realities. But shear right wing extremist ideology.


‘Irrational Fear Mongering vs. rational, open debate’ - this is a fundamental wedge issue between Harper and his Cons and the Liberal Party.


Harper and the Con’s economic policies have the same irrational, fear mongering foundation and total disregard for what is true and best for all Canadians.

Basing our legislation on irrational, ideologically driven policies, whose support is obtained through fear mongering, deception, distortion, obstruction, obscuration and sinister manipulations, makes a farce of and undermines one of the most fundamental principles of our way of life, “The Rule of Law”.

All legislation ought to be put to the test in a fashion as was done in this Report. Perhaps this is something the Senate could do. Then serious second thought, and rigorous, open and enlightened debate in front of all the Nation, given to it in such light, not just in Parliament, but also the media, on the street corner and everywhere.

- Why doesn’t Harper show some class, stand up and admit he was wrong

Small business fears impact of HST, Sep 25, 2009 04:30 AM, Chantal Hébert
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/700811


In fact, Harper is, in reality, paying off the Ontario and BC governments in order to implement this HST = “Harper Sales Tax”, the Ontario government is getting a rebate of approx $4.3 billion from Harper and BC is getting $1.6 billion just to implement it.

The recently released Toronto-Dominion Bank Report, indicates that the HST will represent an effective tax hike of 1.5%.

On the one hand Harper and his Con’s have been going around saying how great it was for the economy to reduce the GST by 2 points. In the other, how great it is for the economy to have it effectively increased by 1.5%.

Why doesn’t Harper show some class, stand up and admit he was wrong to reduce the GST by two points and explain that this is needed to recoup the revenues that were lost by so doing.

Ian Brodie, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff, said in Montreal at the annual conference of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada.

“Despite economic evidence to the contrary, in my view the GST cut worked … It worked in the sense that it helped us to win.”

How much more of this do we have to suffer before we simply just get rid of Harper and his Cons’

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- Lets just give Harper the boot.

post to McLeans, Ian Brodie offers a candid case study in politics and policy
by John Geddes on Friday, March 27, 2009
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/03/27/ian-brodie-offers-a-candid-case-study-in-politics-and-policy/2/

Ian Brodie, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff, said in Montreal at the annual conference of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada.

“Despite economic evidence to the contrary, in my view the GST cut worked … It worked in the sense that it helped us to win.”

When you combine this with what Tom Flanagan, a former Harper adviser, said about the Harper attack ads on Ignatieff rebuilding the coalition after an election,

“It doesn't have to be true. It just has to be plausible and it strikes me as plausible.”

what do you get . . . The current government.

Is this really what Canada is all about.

Lets just give Harper the boot.

- The function of the government of any modern, free, diverse and tolerant Western Democracy is the protect those that need protection ...

The function of the government of any modern, free, diverse and tolerant Western Democracy is the protect those that need protection and help those that need help.

Any ideologically based government, by its very definition favours only a part of the people to the exclusion of the rest. The more extreme the ideology the smaller the group it favours and the larger it excludes and the more restricted is the nature of its actions, to the extent that it acts as if those in power own the country and not serve at the people’s pleasure.

Any action taken by the government must be based on the particular issue at hand and all its relevant circumstance must be weighed in an objective, detached and dispassionate fashion, taking into consideration the opinions from all sides. It must operate in an open, transparent fashion based on the free flow of information, unobstructed and unaltered so that the people may know, understand and formulate their opinions. To the reasonable person this is only fair and just, enlightened. To the extremist it is weakness, indecisiveness, in the vernacular, ‘dithering’.

Power and authority must flow from the people and not vise-versa. The basic law does not grant rights and freedoms to the people, but is based on their rights and freedoms and allots to the government the powers and privileges to impinge on their rights and freedom only to the extent necessary to carry out its function. 

- This highlights some of the most serious faults with the extreme right wing, Harper and the Con’s approach to government

excerpt submitted to Toronto Star,Statistics at odds with people's realityStatistics at odds with people's reality, Sep 21, 2009 04:30 AM CAROL GOAR
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/697978#Comments


- This highlights some of the most serious faults with the extreme right wing, Harper and the Con’s sink-or-swim, Laissez-faire, let the chips fall where they may, only the strong survive, hands–off by the government approach.

However, the whole purpose of a modern, democratic government is to help those that need help and protect those that need protection.

It is easy to say that the Canadian economy is shifting and must redefine itself. But, this macro-economic approach does not take into account the micro-economic suffering imposed upon the individuals and families that are losing their jobs. It does very little good to say that you can switch to another job and you will back working in a year or so, if they go bankrupt and lose everything they have worked so hard for.

Also, the macro-economic approach of looking at the GDP, as the single factor of economic well-being, as Harper has so been want to do, can be very misleading when looked upon at the human level, for precisely the reasons stated by this report by the Global Project on Measuring the Progress of Societies.

The GDP of Canada could be quite good, but it may be due to the very good performance of one particular sector, e.g. oil and gas, but other sectors could be doing very poorly like forestry and manufacturing. The Harper approach, “let the strong survive”. However, the whole purpose of a modern, democratic government is to help those that need help and protect those that need protection. Harper and the Cons are fixed in the capitalistic model of economic governance of a very much bygone era.

As long as Harper and the Cons are in power there is very little chance that there will be any Canadian government agencies belonging to the Global Project on Measuring the Progress of Societies.

Best for Canada is to simply give Harper the boot.

- There is very little doubt that Layton will prop up the Con’s as much as possible, including in the upcoming non-confidence vote.

posted to: Jack Layton puts his party on political hot seatSep 20, 2009 04:30 AM, ANGELO PERSICHILLI
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/697996#Comments


If the voters of Canada don’t want elections so frequently, then they must come to terms with voting a majority. The Con’s have approx 31% core supporters and God help us if they get a majority.

That leaves the Liberals, and for the Liberals to get a majority a significant number of people who have been voting other parties, including NDP, will have to vote Liberal. If they don’t, it is quite simple, we will be stuck with Harper again and perhaps another minority.

There is not much chance that Layton would increase the number of NDP seats and they are, currently, there to be lost.

Given what I have observed about Layton over the years, my impression is that Layton is not the type of guy who would want to force an election right now, despite NDP ideology and despite previously expressed opposition to Harper and the Con’s .

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

- HST = Harper Sales Tax (Ignatieff)

Excerpt posted to G&M: Silver – Powers, Wednesday, September 16, 2009 11:12 AM
Harper's HST revisionism , Robert Silver
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/silver-powers/harpers-hst-revisionism/article1289702/
and, "Thousands attend HST rallies in B.C.", Vancouver — The Canadian Press Saturday, Sep. 19, 2009 06:44PM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/thousands-of-bc-residents-attend-hst-rallies/article1294430/


It is Harper and the Cons that are really behind this. Harper has been putting pressure on the provinces for quite a while to do the “harmonization” thing. In his budget speech Harper states that:
“Provincial sales tax harmonization is the single most important step provinces with RSTs could take to improve the competitiveness of Canadian businesses."
(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/silver-powers/harpers-hst-revisionism/article1289702/)

In fact, Harper is, in reality, paying off the Ontario and BC governments in order to implement this HST = “Harper Sales Tax”, the Ontario government is getting a rebate of approx $4.3 billion from Harper and BC is getting $1.6 billion just to implement it.

The recently released Toronto-Dominion Bank Report, indicates that the HST will represent an effective tax hike of 1.5%. (http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090918.whst0918/GIStory/)
On the one hand Harper and his Con’s have been going around saying how great it was for the economy to reduce the GST by 2 points. In the other, how great it is for the economy to have it effectively increased by 1.5%.

Harper is managing to claw back 75% of the GST reduction he so recklessly brought in to the detriment our economy. Further, he will, no doubt, point to this as part of his “fiscal achievements” and at the same time have the Provincial governments take the blame.

Why doesn’t Harper show some class, stand up and admit he was wrong to reduce the GST by two points and explain that this is needed to recoup the revenues that were lost by so doing.

How much more of this do we have to suffer before we simply just get rid of Harper and his Cons’

- You can’t compare Harper to Diefenbaker or Mulroney, especially to explain away Harper’s exceedingly ‘modest background’.

excerpt submitted to: Ignatieff must reach average Canadians, STEPHEN MAHER LETTER FROM OTTAWA , Sat. Sep 19 - 4:46 AM
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Columnists/1143380.html

But both John Diefenbaker, Brian Mulroney were ‘Big’ (although, I never liked Mulroney and too young to have liked or disliked Diefenbaker). Both were part of a political party, the Progressive Conservatives Party of Canada, that had a long and proud history in the contribution to the building of a nation – i.e., Canada. Harper is small, has no history to look upon with pride, conducts himself and his politics, both domestically and at the International level, in a mean, petty, ‘small’ fashion. Harper feels he must hide what he stands for from the general public (and he’s right-on in that matter).

When did Diefenbaker or Mulroney, as part of their general approach regarding debate in Parliament, ever so insult honourable members of the Opposition in Parliament in lieu of answering serious questions on matters of national importance, and to their face (for example calling Bob Rae a ‘left wing incompetent’ – as set out in Queens University, The Journal, 18 Sep.’09, “… During Question Period on Monday, [Harper] called Bob Rae a “left-wing incompetent.” I don’t care whether the man is or isn’t competent—you’re the Prime Minister. Act with a modicum of dignity, please …”, http://www.queensjournal.ca/story/2009-09-18/opinions/raising-political-bar/).


When did Diefenbaker or Mulroney ever launch such attack ads with such raw emotional venom, and total disregard for the truth (as per Tom Flanagan).

When did Diefenbaker or Mulroney ever hide from the general public what they really stood for.

Harper’s aim is to minimalize Canada, dismantle our great nation to the great detriment of all Canadians and to favour a few. His approach is to incite his core supporters with emotional attacks on his ‘enemies’ with total disregard for truth and the good of our nation.

The fact is that the Conservative Party is not the Progressive Conservative Party of Canadian history and Harper is not part of it – just ask Brian Mulroney who didn’t even mention Harper’s name at the ‘fence mending’ gala for Cons and PC’s held the other night, which just so happens, Harper was unable to attend, surprise, surprise.


There is nothing wrong with ‘taking the high road’ and there is nothing wrong with having a background that any leader in a modern, open, tolerant, democracy, would envy, except, perhaps, one with an extreme, right wing agenda, and who applies the ‘propaganda’ approach of appealing to core supporters with emotion and not reason, disregarding the truth.

All Canadians ought to take a close look at Harper’s background. As I suggested to Kelly McParland last week “Perhaps you can post Harper's Resume next to Ignatieff's Resume and let Canadians compare.

Get rid of Harper and his Con’s.

- why the serious damage control by Harper if there is no potential damage

Posted to: Globe and Mail, “Obama snubs Harper?”, Stephen Wicary, Wednesday, September 16, 2009 05:36 PM,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/obama-snubs-harper/article1290038/

I have to say it was a bit eye brow raising to hear about Harper’s greeting. Under normal circumstances I may not read too much into it. But, given Harper’s abysmal track record on diplomacy and his “in-your-face” approach to International relations, there is probably some significance to this. The fact that Harper's office would release that statement within minutes is a sure indication that there is serious significance to this - vis.: why the serious damage control if there is no potential damage.

Apparently there was to be 10 – 15 minutes, tête à tête, which is also eye-brow raising, and very ‘not-normal’. This seems to be a MO of Harper’s – i.e. hidden from the public view, and I have no problem inferring that it was Harper that requested it.

It is outrageous that Harper would talk with Obama for 10 – 15 minutes and not inform the Canadian people of what the substance of the conversation was about. This is a formal, official state visit, with Harper there only because he is the Prime Minister. Anything sensitive would have been discussed between offices before hand. What could possibly be so sensitive that Harper could not trust his assistants and official representatives, etc., to discuss it with their counterparts … Harper planning to invade the US???. This is not some private affair between two individuals, or a client seeking a lawyer’s advise.

This secrecy by Harper (other, countless, instances – countless if for no other reason than they are kept secret, hidden from us) should be a concern to all Canadians, and Americans, in this matter.

- Kelly,Perhaps you can post Harper's Resume next to Ignatieff's Resume and let Canadians compare.

submitted to: Kelly McParland: Michael Ignatieff's Canada is stuck in 1978
Posted: September 15, 2009, 5:15 PM by NP Editor

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/09/15/kelly-mcparland-michael-ignatieff-s-canada-is-stuck-in-1978.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

Show us Stephen Harper's "passport filled with exotic stamps" before we were bestowed with the pleasure of his leadership (normally it is the Will of the Canadian People that bestow the honour and privilege on the individual, but Harper and his Cons have it backwards), and after for that mater.

Canadians are able, including Ignatieff whom you seem to feel is somehow a DDEP (de facto disenfranchised person), to look back with pride on Canada's role in the world and its interaction with all nations in the International Community. Ignatieff, himself, has contributed to Canada's stature in the International community himself over the years. In fact, his family has a tradition of doing Canada proud on the International scene.

Harper has no such tradition and, in fact, until he became our 'fearless leader' was for over 30 years completely devoid of any kind of relevant International experience whatsoever.

These attacks on Ignatieff are an obvious attempt to hide this fact and incite core supporters who don't care if they are true.

Harper's complete lack of experience in combination with his extreme right wing ideology, "in your face" approach to International diplomacy has seriously hurt Canada's image and stature on the world stage.

Harper is not the way Canadians want to be thought of by others in other countries.

Lets stand up and be counted, "stand on guard" for Canada and get rid of Harper and his Cons.

Lloyd Maclquham cicblog.com/comments.html, and after for that mater.

Canadians are able, including Ignatieff whom you seem to feel is somehow a DEP (de facto disenfranchised person), to look back with pride on Canada's role in the world and its interaction with all nations in the International Community. Ignatieff, himself, has contributed to Canada's stature in the International community himself over the years. In fact, his family has a tradition of doing Canada proud on the International scene.

Harper has no such tradition and, in fact, until he became our 'fearless leader' was for over 30 years completely devoid of any kind of relevant International experience whatsoever. These attacks on Ignatieff are an obvious attempt to hide this fact and incite core supporters who don't care if they are true.

Harper's complete lack of experience in combination with his extreme right wing ideology, "in your face" approach to International diplomacy has seriously hurt Canada's image and stature on the world stage. Harper is not the way Canadians want to be thought of by others in other countries.

Lets stand up and be counted, "stand on guard" for Canada and get rid of Harper and his Cons.

- Chrétien, and all Liberals, have always stood tall, held their head up with pride for what they believe in

excerpt submitted to: Best answer to the Quebec question? A majority
Sep 13, 2009 04:30 AM, Angelo Persichilli
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/694585

in reply to: Another Voice Of Reason


Everyone knows that he and the Liberals represented the middle of the road. However, I can see how someone who is viewing matters from the extremely far right might feel the need to so present.

In fact, Chrétien was always very clear as to where he stood and what he stood for. He, and all Liberals, stood tall, held their head up with pride for what they believe in.

Harper on the other hand hides from Canadian what he truly represents, as was clearly demonstrated by the closed door Sault Ste Marie meeting, . In fact, as I am sure you are aware, there is a grass roots movement amongst Conservatives to demand that Harper stand up, with his head held high, no longer hiding like it is some kind of sin, and proclaim, openly to all Canadians, his right wing ideological roots and intentions. For example, Gerry Nicholls, formerly vice president of the National Citizens Coaliton, "The next time the Tories send you a fundraising letter, write them back a polite note indicating you no longer wish to financially support a political party which acts more Liberal than Conservative" (see, "Gerry Nicholls: Canada needs conservatives, not Conservatives, National Post, September 11, 2009"); as well as, a recent interview with Tom Flanagan).

I can respect Gerry Nicholls for standing up for what he believes. And, I can respect Tom Flanagan for doing the same. However, I do not subscribe to their ideology and I do not agree with their political objectives.

However, I can not see how anyone can honestly have respect for Stephan Harper both for not having the courage of his convictions and for the way he has treated our parliamentary institutions, his political opponents and, when it gets right down to it, the good people of Canada.

You suggest that the problem is that Toronto has too much representation because it is based on population and so it should be changed to square milage.

I am surprised that Harper has not announced such a suggestion about disenfranchising Toronto, a large anti-Harper bastion. After all he did introduce a Bill C-56 a while back to expend the number of riding in a fashion that seriously under represented Ontario and Toronto. (see for example, "Premier Mcguinty Asks For Amendment To Bill C-56 - September 16, 2007", http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/news/event.php?ItemID=3742&Lang=en). One need not think too hard to come up with a 'plausible' explanation as to why Harper would want to dis-enfranchise Toronto.

Ontarians obviously have something to look forward to if Harper and the Con's were to get a majority. Better we simply give him the boot.

- There is only one thing the people of Quebec, and the rest of Canada for that matter, can do. Get rid of Harper and the Cons'.

excerpt submitted to: Best answer to the Quebec question? A majority
Sep 13, 2009 04:30 AM, Angelo Persichilli
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/694585


"I believe Quebec voters are comfortable with the Bloc not because they want to separate but because it's very convenient to have their own party in Ottawa that cares only about their interests."

Angelo, you may have something there.

It has been a long time since I can recall Duceppe and the Block calling for separation of Quebec from Canada. In fact, Duceppe makes it quite clear that he is there to get the best for Quebec. There is good reason for it and your analysis certainly plays an important part, in particular, they don't want to separate.

Harper calling the Block separatist, who must not have a say in how Canada is governed disenfranchises approximately 41% of all of Quebec and effectively cuts them off from representation. Harper uses it also, and this is very important, to incite his core supporters, the vast majority in the West. This, in itself is divisive and threatens Canadian unity, which I am sure is what Harper is really referring in his attack ads made for Quebec.

With Harper in power the benefits to Quebec of having the Block in Ottawa is effectively neutralized. You can be sure, right wing extremism and the West will be favoured over the interests of Quebec, no matter what Harper and his Con's may say now and during an election. Harper and the Con's are rooted in extreme right wing ideology. Their power base is all the right wingers in Alberta and even Saskatchewan and to some extent BC. The closed door Sault Ste Marie speech to party faithfuls is precisely about maintaining the support of, and inciting, the right wing. There is a grass roots movement amongst Conservatives to demand that Harper stand up, with his head held high, no longer hiding like it is some kind of sin, and proclaim, openly to all Canadians, his right wing ideological roots and intentions. For example, Gerry Nicholls, formerly vice president of the National Citizens Coaliton, "The next time the Tories send you a fundraising letter, write them back a polite note indicating you no longer wish to financially support a political party which acts more Liberal than Conservative" (see, "Gerry Nicholls: Canada needs conservatives, not Conservatives, National Post, September 11, 2009"; as well as a recent interview with Tom Flanigan)

The last election demonstrated that 2/3 rds of Canadians are opposed to right wing extremist ideologues running our country. This is particularly true in Quebec, if I may so bold as to suggest.

People in Quebec may feel comfortable voting Block, but, if Harper returns to power and Quebec votes the Block, then Quebec will be out in the cold.

There is only one thing the people of Quebec, and the rest of Canada for that matter, can do. Get rid of Harper and the Cons'.

- Canadians, also, have a lot to gain by an election - Getting rid of Harper and the Con's.

Submitted to: "Ignatieff has nothing to lose if the writ drops, And neither do we, so bring it on"
By Randall Denley, The Ottawa CitizenSeptember 13, 2009
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Ignatieff+nothing+lose+writ+drops/1989118/story.html#Comments


If Harper co-operated and worked with the Opposition parties there would be no election right now. Whether there is an election or not is not up to the Liberals. Nor is it up to the NDP or Block. It is up to Harper.

Unfortunately, Harper right from the start has taken the “in-your-face”, “my-way-or-the-highway”, “no-compromise” approach. He and the Cons have deliberately obstructed Parliament, including the Parliamentary Committees, to the point of being dysfunctional for their own partizan purposes and to the harm of all Canadians. He also uses it as a smoke screen for implementing on a slow but steady and insidious fashion his right wing extremist ideology through the Administrative side of the government. For example, apparently one of the worst things a Liberal government could do as far as Harper and his core of Con's is concerned is appoint left-wing ideologues to the judiciary. Well, given the sentiment, you can well imagine what ideology Harper is looking for in his appointees.

Harper and his Con's have shamelessly disrupted Parliament to the point of being dysfunctional then used this to justify his calling an election against his own legislation last fall as well as suspending Parliament. His approach is so extreme and so uncompromising that the only way to get Harper to compromise and do the right things is to threaten him with loss of power, i.e. real possibility of a non-confidence vote.

Part of the Harper strategy is to incite his core supporters with accusations, quite false, of the Liberals intending to undermine our democratic process to form a government if Harper doesn't get a majority. Harper fails to mention, of course, that he joined up with the NDP and Block, that's right, the same socialists and separatists, in an attempt to "overthrough" the Martin government in '04. Harper also fails to mention that it is precisely the same Parliamentary system that gave him power in the first place despite having 2/3rds of Canadians vote against him. One-third of the population supporting Harper does not represent the will of the people. In a minority the will of the people is compromise, work together. Harper refuses, even to the point of forcing an election.

- Harper and the Con's have developed and use the greatest propaganda machine seen in Western democracies in recent times.

Here is an analysis of the Obama speech a few days ago:
September 11, 2009 , An Obama Speech in 13 Easy Steps, By Rich Lowry
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/09/11/an_obama_speech_in_13_easy_steps_98267.html

If one calls that the 'ration' school of speech writing.

Then I suggest to you the following analysis of the 'propaganda school of speech writing:


The 'Propaganda' approach:
- lie
- blunt statement of what you want people to believe
- total disregard for the truth (not exactly the same as lying but helps to bolster them)
- disregard for the context of events but crass manipulation to suite your purpose
- slanderous accusations against opponents
- blunt statements "we're right - their wrong", “we're good – they're bad”, etc.
- designed to incite people emotionally both to create fear and motivate to action, i.e. a call-to-arms

The underlying principle is, of course, “if you tell a big enough lie often enough people will begin to believe it”


I invite all Canadians to apply my analysis of the 'Propaganda' approach to the, now infamous, covert Harper speech of last week, Harper and they Con's attack ads and pretty much everything that comes out of Harper's and the Con's mouths.

There is a reason, of course, why Harper and the Con's use the Propaganda approach. Quite simply, the vast majority of Canadians are against right wing extremist ideology and 2/3 rds voted against Harper and the Con's in the last election. Harper knows that if he were 'to stand up and be counted', hold his head up with pride and openly and truthfully tell the good people of Canada exactly what he stands for, he, and teh Con's, would lose power.

- 2/3rds of Canadians voted against Harper. It's time he were given the boot.

submitted to:
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1142053.html
Here’s the deal, despite what they say
STEPHEN MAHER Letter From Ottawa
Sat. Sep 12 - 4:46 AM


For Harper and the Cons it simply doesn't matter if it is true whether Ignatieff and Liberals intend to reform the coalition.

We saw this with Flanagan last week and yesterday when Mr. Ignatieff stated that he would not be forming a coalition and immediately after Harper's Parliamentary secretary, Pierre Poilievre, said that Ignatieff had not ruled out that possibility.

Perhaps Harper could explain why his alliance with what he labels as 'socialist and separatists' was ok for him and the Con's in Sep.'04 to 'overthrough' the Martin minority, but now when it would work against him it 'threatens Canadian unity'.

Apparently the new Harper attack ads accuse Ignatieff and the Liberals of threatening national unity. Perhaps Harper would like to explain exactly what it is that he means by this.

The Harper strategy is not to inform Canadians and Harper has no interest in to what extent it reflects the truth.

The Harper accusations of Ignatieff going to form a coalition is being done precisely to incite core supporters of Harper and the Con's. There will be much more of this in the days to come, you can be assured. I can only suggest that we all as Canadians take note of this.

2/3rds of Canadians voted against Harper. It's time he were given the boot.