September 14, 2009 / 10:05
I don't want an election but your blinders are always on when it comes to Harper. He can do no wrong in your mind.
And if there is an election, what do you care, Harper will win it.
September 14, 2009 / 10:31
Fred may have a lot too much love in for Harper (I'm certainly no fan of the one man show he has made the centre right in this country), but he's dead right on this...liberals for decades now have thrown everything and a truck load of cash at weary voters in the elections where conservative governments have had to make tough and unpopular choices during economic slow downs.
The belt tightening from their predecessors, and improved tax revenue from general economic improvement puts the money back in the government coffers and then they have the audacity to claim they were the only government that could have shown us prosperity.
Talk about riding the coat-tails of those that made the tough calls, but far more than even those choices, they ride on the hard work and enterprise of Canadians that paid the tax dollars into that sinkhole called Ottawa in the first place...remember that when you hear the liberals ride on "their record"...it is far from theirs, it is ours, and they like 40%+ of our income, they like to steal the credit for your hard work from you too.
September 14, 2009 / 10:52
Being the Opposition is boring and lowly.
Although Jack has positioned himself well as the pseudo opp-.
There's only one job they want and they'll do anything to get it.
September 14, 2009 / 11:05
Incredible again Fred. You don't address the election that Harper called last year on the cusp of decending into a world recession. This was the same team that said Canada was fine there weren't any problems. This is also the man that set legislation into place to arrange fixed elections and then turns around and calls one himself?? Illegal I don't know that's what the court case will determine. Un-ethical completly. As for the 300 million it cost get over it Harper did the same thing last year and you didn't knock him for calling one. As for this nonsense about causing harm to the economy by forcing an election, what are you basing these facts on?
who are you kidding about pushing elections??? Hapless and his group have pushed for how many elections in the last 4 years???? As for the economy doing well, you can thank Paul Martin for much of that his team are responsible for the strength of our countries financial standing and ability to weather a storm.
Fred please address how we have a finance minister that can't seem to get his numbers straight. One moment the conservatives won't run a deficit, next it will be 30 billion then it's 50 billion and that number keeps growing each time that loser has to stand up to the podium.
September 14, 2009 / 11:34
The thing is, Harper or Iggy the country is doomed. I think your comment "and the country doing quite nicely thank-you" shows the mentality of most of the main stream media swallowing public. Until we get a government that puts all Canadian and Canada first, our economic woes will continue. A country does not have a healthy balanced economy without a strong manufacturing base. That thought seems to be lacking by both of these so called leaders. Harper hell bent on signing more and more bad trade deals for Canada and Iggy saying we need to expand out partnerships with India and China. Good lord. Thats were all our jobs are going! Don't they see Canadians pushing, talking about buying local, BUYING CANADIAN! We can't all work in the oil fields in Alberta! If things keep going the way they are, hell, it's going to be tough getting hired at Wal-Mart!
September 14, 2009 / 11:57
Bring on an election. I cant' wait to see Ignatieff eff this one up for the third time for the Liberals.
And for sake of conversation if Ignatieff wins, he'll win a minority. Big friggin' difference he'll be able to make.
Instead of playing the minority government sitation to his benefit and using the time to look like the diplomat and the one wearing the pants in parliament he's rushing an election and will end up putting the Liberal Party further into debt.
I can't wait to see Harper chew him up and spit him out.
p.s. I miss Mikey. :(
September 14, 2009 / 12:15
Harper didn't care last year when he called an unnecessary call to the polls. Then he pretended there was no economic crisis.
He blast the Liberals for their proposed coalition with the NDP and the Bloc while Harper works with the Bloc and NDP all the time to keep his government afloat. Steve may again work with them to avoid being brought down.
This country deserves a better government than the one we have now.
September 14, 2009 / 13:18
Doesn't Ignatieff look like Spock's father? That may get him a few votes from the Trekies.
September 14, 2009 / 14:11
I'm all for another election if I knew one of the parties would win a majority. Obviously I want the Cons to win but I would take even a Liberal majority simply because I'm sick of minority govts.
We've seen what happens when a party has a minority govt - we get this watered down governing that tires to please everyone. Ultimately it really doesn't please anyone and every fall we're threatened by talk of another election.
September 14, 2009 / 14:14
can anybody explain to me why the liberals keep shooting themselves in the head?
September 14, 2009 / 15:08
Billy - Because the Liberals aren't too bright. They think because Toronto Star loves them everyone does.
They elected Dion as their leader. Do we need to question their level of intelligence?
If the Liberals had a smart leader with charisma that could run their party then Harper would be in serious trouble. Instead they gives us Beaker and then Lurch.
September 14, 2009 / 16:11
Argie, you’ve got to be kidding… you want a majority govt? I don’t want any of our parties to have a majority. There are just too many crazy left and right ideologues in the parties to entrust any of them with a majority. What spared Canada in part from a US style economic meltdown is that our minority govt was forced to find middle ground on key issues to move legislation forward taking into consideration the other side’s views—rather than blindly following their party’s idealistic vision of some utopian society or other bullshit.
Out current set up forces the jokers in Ottawa to listen to the opposition and consider their views rather than shove some half-baked superior world view or some other nonsense down our throats. It’s a forced political pragmatism and I love it.
September 14, 2009 / 16:53
No fern, I'm not kidding. It hasn't been a case of 'political pragmatism', but rather a wishy washy leadership.
Being socially and fiscally conservative, I want Harper to do what many in his party want - that is to govern in accordance with conservative values. With his current minority govt, all we have is politically correct appointments (see Michele Jean, John Baird and a bunch of Quebec MPs who have no business being a minister of anything). Harper then goes on to apologize to the indians on behalf of Christian churches who were only trying to civilized these people.
He has neglected to bring in income splitting to encourage parents to stay home with their preschool kids and earlier this year instituted one of the most dangerous budgets in Canadian history (he's spending like a drunken sailor). Of course I wont go into g@y marriage or abortion laws.....but I could.
I truly wonder if a liberal majority could be worse.
September 14, 2009 / 17:34
A Liberal majority? Please no! If we have to have a majority, I hope it's a Conservative one.
September 14, 2009 / 17:34
I don't care for Stephen Harper or the Conservatives. But you can't deny the fact that that Harper is a brilliant politician. It looks like Harper has the votes to survive once again.
Looks like he's is getting some help from his good friends the NDP and the Bloc.
September 14, 2009 / 23:53
How about a moratorium on elections? If Harper wins the next one, no elections for four years. A new election ever year or two is a waste of time and money.
September 15, 2009 / 00:18
Oliver, what blind liberal supporter or socialist NDPer would support that? There's the whole battle right there.
September 15, 2009 / 08:34
Harper has done nothing. you can't screw up much if you sit on your thumb or travel the world. I would have thought with your opinions you wouldn't have become a conservative weenie. No government is perfect. Harper has done nothing, the turn-around was bound to happen. It had nothing much to do with Ottawa or Harpers band of assholes.
September 15, 2009 / 11:22
Good to have you back Freddie. You're last 3 posts have been golden.
September 15, 2009 / 12:55
James, with due respect, you have just definied what sucks about a Minority Parliament. Before Harper, Martin did nothing as well.
Ontario Premier McGuinty makes a career of sitting on his thumb and he has a majority for a second time around. That will be 8 years of doldrums.
September 15, 2009 / 23:06
Looks like Harper's got this whole socialism down now that he's extending EI benefits.
Oliver - Harper already promised fixed elections dates, made it a law, then broke that law. So lets not hold our breath...
Argie - what you said about christians only trying to 'civilize' the natives in this country was so far beyond your normal hateful, racist rhetoric I had to read it 4 or 5 times before I was actually convinced it was true. Once again your ignorance is shocking on a level I didn't think was attainable before.
One more thing...I missed you too Pauly!!
September 16, 2009 / 01:25
Why do I think there will be an election soon ?
Iggy's ego. He needs to be PM to show us all how clever he is. If he can't he will slink back to the ivory towers of academia, sulk and write essays about how the lumpen masses just don't get it. Anybody seen Bob Rae lately ?
September 16, 2009 / 09:54
Mikey - Glad to see you were able to get your hands a on a PC to contribute to the discussion. Thanks for using the word 'racist'. It only proves you have nothing substantial to argue my point. You know I'm right - you just dont have the balls to admit it.
BTW, can I just address you as 'Mike'? Mikey seems kind of g@y. And yes, there is something wrong with that.
September 16, 2009 / 12:38
Mikey, that was meant for Mr. Harris, but what the hell, if it makes your day, I missed you too.
BTW, please clarify something for me since you seem and many other repeat that Harper broke the law. What part of the law did he break and if so what are the consequences to breaking the law and why hasn't Harper paid the consequences?
September 16, 2009 / 14:27
Changes to the Canada Election Act in 2007, Bill C-16. I can't answer the other questions because since I'm not a government attorney.
Argie - it actually pains me that there's not a hell for you to go to. Although it does warm my heart knowing that if you were given an enema you could be buried in a matchbox.
September 16, 2009 / 14:29
At least Harper got somewhere with the charter flights issue, so he is doing something...
September 16, 2009 / 14:44
Mikey, thanks for making my point.
You dont' know, stop spreading lies, because simply put that is what they are.
September 16, 2009 / 15:03
Mikey - That's great you're defending our fine First Nations people - or whatever they're calling themselves this week.
If I'm going to hell it won't be because of what I wrote about the natives. I'm only stating my honest opinion.
September 16, 2009 / 17:32
Pauly, actually a court case is under way to determine if Harper broke the law by calling an illegal election last year. This is based on the fact that he introduced legislation relegating elections to every four years like our american counter parts. Only 2.5 years after setting this legislation into play he called an election. This becomes a problem on several fronts. But right from the mouth of the worm himself
"Fixed dates stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar," Harper told reporters in May, 2006 when he introduced the legislation. He then ignored this..... Why you might ask well had he waited even a month more and the world officially claimed a recession and jobs across the country started going up in smoke Harper would have been in a right mess. Instead by ignoring his legislation and having an election and saying that there was no recession and Canada was fine he could ignore voters turning on him if he faced a non confidence vote or any reprisal in 2009 at his fixed election date. Remember Pauly, no one asked harper to introduce such legislation he did so to apparently keep everyone else honest but himself.
Section 56.1
(1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Governor General, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General's discretion.
Subject to subsection (1), each general election must be held on the third Monday of October in the fourth calendar year following polling day for the last general election, with the first general election after this section (coming) into force being held on Monday, October 19, 2009.
September 16, 2009 / 18:23
Exactly.
Pauly, try to stay on top of current events.
September 16, 2009 / 18:55
Mikey....(good name) that was the best line I've heard in a long time... eniema.... matchbox.... brilliant! That's much better than a handbasket!!! ha ha ha......
September 16, 2009 / 22:58
***YAWN***
September 16, 2009 / 23:10
Frank, I know what the details of what you guys are constantly referring to, however the point I was making is that its been almost 3 years and nothing has come of it? How long is it going to take? Seems rather long for a cut and dry breaking of the law don't you think? Hasn't the statute of limitation run out on it? How come the Liberal Party, the NDP and the Bloc don't seem to give a rats ass about it?
Mikey, Who is Frank your big brother who you have answering for you? Pushing 3 years is current events for you I see.
September 17, 2009 / 18:38
Pauly clearly you aren't getting this. It's not been 3 years since he had what could turn out to be an illegal election it's not even one year. ONCE again to end what you clearly don't understand is that this isn't an event from 3 years ago. The legislation is from that time, but the question on legality of an election isn't even a year old. Hopefully this now clears things up for you.
September 18, 2009 / 12:45
Frank, granted I haven't been following this one as close as you guys have... probably because it is a non-issue. And apparently I'm right. Sorry to dissapoint.
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7016438586?Federal%20Court%20Of%20Canada%20Declares%20Legal%20Harper's%202008%20Snap%20Election%20Call
Allow me to quote the Judge's decision: "It appears that the Prime Minister's decision to advise the Governor General is not reviewable because the power to dissolve Parliament is the Governor General's prerogative, not the Prime Minister's; however, the Prime Minister's power can be seen as a prerogative because, it is discretionary, it is not based on a statutory grant of power and has its roots in the historical power of the Monarch."
Furthermore I quote "the Applicants' (Democracy Watch) submissions do not demonstrate a proper understanding of the separation of powers... The remedy for the Applicants' contention is not for the Federal Court to decide, but rather one for the count of the ballot box."
September 27, 2009 / 10:02
Michaelle Jean truly supports Harper. Let`s hope when he`s gone, she goes with him.
There are a lot of no-minds licking their lips today. Especially in the GTA, where we have a passion to be pushed around by Liberals and tolerate anything they do based solely of the fact that they aren't Conservatives. These are the same people, who actually think that Michael Ignatieff isn't power hungry.
Site Feed
Recent Posts, Recent Comments & Categories
