Nanos - UB Poll: Majorities in Canada and the US support greater co-operation

Nik, I am personally a great admirer of the Americans. Their drive and family values along with a desire to be productive in conjunction with their intense desire to be free is a beacon of light in this world.

That said both Countries can learn a lot from each other

[updated Wed Feb 18 23:21:43 EST 2009]

You got that right about China, were fed up with this country and the Thugs in Beijing, No imports from China period would be best for Canadians.

[updated Thu Feb 19 01:20:56 EST 2009]

Quiet Canadians are not very good at selling themselves to our good neighbour south of the border whether it is promoting tourism by provincial governments or promoting economic realities by the federal government. Somehow, we are each the others best trading partner and apparently an unknown fact to many. Natural resources such as oil, natural gas, electricity, lumber, iron ore, metals are difficult to slap a MADE IN CANADA label on while all finished products from Japan, China or the UK carry a label.

Naturally, the US desires greater integration of energy as it is a one way flow unless it is refined petroleum products that we do not seem to be able to do entirely in Canada.

I am surprised there was not a higher percentage of Americans desiring better border security when I heard last week there are 9 Canadians patrolling the Great Lakes with 2000 patrolling on the US side. I know the US Coastguard is usually quicker to respond to waterway incidents on the international border with BC----and on the Canadian side----than are Canadian authorities. I know Canadian authorities were quite good at "losing" boatloads of illegal Chinese immigrants that are known to have landed on the West Coast of Vancouver Island and, it is assumed, most "drifted" across the border into the US as they "evaporated".

It is reasonable that Canadians know more about the US than Americans know about Canada. It is just the same as when we were in school and we knew a lot more about the big kids than they ever knew about the little kids.

With Obama's visit coming up today,I hope we are not going to hear more political rhetoric about stimulus packages signalling "the beginning of the end" as we heard yesterday. The realistic assessment appears to be ( if anybody really knows ) that Canada and the US will fare better than any of the EU economies or Asian economies, the US dollar will outperform all other currencies but we are still in a mess that deepens daily. It is going to be hell for those unlucky individuals at the bottom of the economic pile and I am equally sure the big bank and auto executives will not starve as they feast on government largess paid for by the little people.

[updated Thu Feb 19 05:51:13 EST 2009]

CANADA GOES PSYCHO!

They were a quiet country according to their neighbours. They'd wave and say Hi, but that's all you would ever hear from them.

Then suddenly and unexpectedly the whole damn country went psycho.

They obsessed and stalked the man of the (white) house next door. They filled the ether with mash notes of unrequited lust.

It was like something out of fatal attraction!

We need help folks.

[updated Thu Feb 19 09:30:57 EST 2009]

Thank you again Nik for providing some more insight with our Canadian nature of being more suspicious regarding American goods and people crossing into Canada.

Do you have that broken down by region or are the numbers too small to keep it accurate?

I am curious if Quebec with it's suspicious beliefs of the Anglo culture and loss of it's Quebec culture to the English and Americans would be higher than the rest of Canada.

[updated Thu Feb 19 12:03:40 EST 2009]

Yes We Can Versus I Said No.

Boy, am I surprised to see this summit going so well. I can't believe how much President Obama is smiling -- he's still at it, even after spending over four hours with our Prime Minister...

I never thought these men would hit it off. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the Depression Summit. If today is any indication, Canadian concerns will not only be listened to respectively but also addressed in a timely manner.

Stephen Harper has fared better than I expected. He is to be commended.

[updated Thu Feb 19 14:56:26 EST 2009]

I agree with the Polls more and more that we need a stronger relationship with the United States on many issues from Trade, North American Security, Securities, Banking, Soft Wood Lumber, and keeping this crap produced in China out of country. And do not care what they have to say in Quebec, get inline with the rest of the country, you ignorant and arrogant fools. That causes 95% of the problems in Canada to day!

[updated Thu Feb 19 16:24:53 EST 2009]

Does anyone know what Michael Igna has been doing lately, he has been kind of quiet lately?

[updated Thu Feb 19 18:15:11 EST 2009]

It is not surprising to see general agreement on a range of issues relative to both countries. We are relatively similar in language, demographics, culture etc. so it's only natural that there is a fair amount of understanding and cooperation.
It is also understandable that Americans have less knowledge of or interest in Canada than Canadians of the US.
The people of Toronto have know less about Nain than the other way around.

Yes most Canadians are happy to see a US administration turn back to human rights concerns that was sadly lacking in the precious one. Harper's government may get back on track too, now.

Business values are close everywhere. It's the nature of business. Any closer ties are related to those characteristics mentioned in the first one or two sentences.
I agree with the paragraph re business values perceptions.

I can never understand Americans concern over national security. They must have some form of innate fear or insecurity complex. Surely a handful on international criminals cannot be a serious threat to them. (or to Canada) Imagine how paranoid they would be if they had to live in some of the insecure countries of the world. They should be happy and thank their lucky stars. (as I do in Canada)

Integration with the policies of the US or other countries is something I am not in agreement with. Cooperation? Yes. But formal agreements? No. We don't know what kind of situation we may find ourselves in in the future. I would want the freedom to do things our own way.

Goods coming into our country. Man; that's a book in itself. and I am not much more happier with American goods than I am with Chinese. Or even in our own country where manufaturers can get away with murder; especially food producers.

[updated Thu Feb 19 19:20:00 EST 2009]

The Border And Security.

I thought that the Prime Minister scored some points with the American media. When the PM says that any threat to the U.S. is also a threat to Canada, I agree with him.

However, where I differ with Harper is on the role played by the Canada Border Services Agency (Customs). I see improvements in our airports and at marine cargo terminals. Truck shipments are also more heavily scrutinized by inspectors. On the other hand, I worry about rail traffic and especially passenger cars crossing into Canada:

I have two questions for the PM - has CBSA scrapped their policy of putting students at primary inspection stations at customs ports? I hope so. No one can convince me that a summer student is qualified to protect our border security.

Secondly, now that we are arming customs officers, what is the policy regarding cars that "run" the border? Will border guards fire at fleeing cars? Or will it be like in the past as cars skirted across the border without challenge because RCMP officers were not posted at some border points?

Too bad Harper did not have the opportunity to address these two questions at the joint press conference.

[updated Thu Feb 19 23:26:54 EST 2009]

Here's how both Americans and Canadians can benefit from Harper being gone;all these rules were implemented by successive Liberal governments:

From the magazine issue dated Monday, Feb 16, 2009
The legendary editor of The New Republic, Michael Kinsley, once held a "Boring Headline Contest" and decided that the winner was "Worthwhile Canadian Initiative." Twenty-two years later, the magazine was rescued from its economic troubles by a Canadian media company, which should have taught us Americans to be a bit more humble. Now there is even more striking evidence of Canada's virtues. Guess which country, alone in the industrialized world, has not faced a single bank failure, calls for bailouts or government intervention in the financial or mortgage sectors. Yup, it's Canada. In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada's banking system the healthiest in the world. America's ranked 40th, Britain's 44th.
Canada has done more than survive this financial crisis. The country is positively thriving in it. Canadian banks are well capitalized and poised to take advantage of opportunities that American and European banks cannot seize. The Toronto Dominion Bank, for example, was the 15th-largest bank in North America one year ago. Now it is the fifth-largest. It hasn't grown in size; the others have all shrunk.
So what accounts for the genius of the Canadians? Common sense. Over the past 15 years, as the United States and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries, the Canadians refused to follow suit, seeing the old rules as useful shock absorbers. Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1—compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1 and European banks at a frightening 61 to 1. Partly this reflects Canada's more risk-averse business culture, but it is also a product of old-fashioned rules on banking.
Canada has also been shielded from the worst aspects of this crisis because its housing prices have not fluctuated as wildly as those in the United States. Home prices are down 25 percent in the United States, but only half as much in Canada. Why? Well, the Canadian tax code does not provide the massive incentive for overconsumption that the U.S. code does: interest on your mortgage isn't deductible up north. In addition, home loans in the United States are "non-recourse," which basically means that if you go belly up on a bad mortgage, it's mostly the bank's problem. In Canada, it's yours. Ah, but you've heard American politicians wax eloquent on the need for these expensive programs—interest deductibility alone costs the federal government $100 billion a year—because they allow the average Joe to fulfill the American Dream of owning a home. Sixty-eight percent of Americans own their own homes. And the rate of Canadian homeownership? It's 68.4 percent.
Canada has been remarkably responsible over the past decade or so. It has had 12 years of budget surpluses, and can now spend money to fuel a recovery from a strong position. The government has restructured the national pension system, placing it on a firm fiscal footing, unlike our own insolvent Social Security. Its health-care system is cheaper than America's by far (accounting for 9.7 percent of GDP, versus 15.2 percent here), and yet does better on all major indexes. Life expectancy in Canada is 81 years, versus 78 in the United States; "healthy life expectancy" is 72 years, versus 69. American car companies have moved so many jobs to Canada to take advantage of lower health-care costs that since 2004, Ontario and not Michigan has been North America's largest car-producing region.

(see part 2 next post)

[updated Fri Feb 20 07:51:13 EST 2009]

More "Bad News" for the Doom and Gloom Opposition Parties.

Canadians optimistic about the economy's future: Ekos poll
Last Updated: Friday, February 20, 2009 | 6:01 AM ET Comments20Recommend6
CBC News

Can federal politicians lead us out of the recession?

No confidence

7%

Little confidence

32%

Some confidence

49%

Complete confidence

10%

Fewer housing starts, reduced consumer spending, lower prices for commodities and lost jobs are all problems, but a new poll seems to indicate most Canadians think they won't last.

A new CBC poll conducted by Ekos Research suggests Canadians are not only optimistic the economy will improve, they believe the federal government will lead the way.

Fifty-nine per cent of those surveyed had some, or complete confidence that Ottawa would be able to lead Canada out of the recession.

Will the federal budget stimulate the economy?

Very ineffective

8%

Somewhat ineffective

30%

Somewhat effective

53%

Very effective

4%

Don’t Know

5%

Fifty-seven per cent thought the federal budget would be very effective or somewhat effective in stimulating the economy, and 62 per cent had some or complete confidence in the Bank of Canada’s recent economic forecast.

The governor of the bank, Mark Carney, surprised some analysts with a projection of 3.8 per cent growth for the Canadian economy in 2010.

But Carney believes that will only happen if the U.S. stimulus package actually works to pull the U.S. out of recession.

Confidence in the Bank of Canada forecast

No confidence

8%

Little confidence

26%

Some confidence

55%

Complete confidence

7%

Don’t know

3%

Most Canadians think he is about right with his predictions.

The Toronto Dominion Bank recently downgraded its projections for the coming years. It anticipates the Canadian economy would contract 1.4 per cent for 2009 and grow by 2.8 per cent in 2010.

Eckos conducted the poll between Feb.12-16, 2009, surveying 1,036 Canadians over the age of 18 who were selected randomly.

The survey is considered accurate with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

[updated Fri Feb 20 08:30:10 EST 2009]

Harper goes deft

PM appropriates Obama agenda in breathtaking fashion

By MICHAEL DEN TANDT

Last Updated: 20th February 2009, 4:52am
Game, set and match to Harper.

It was probably inevitable, given the virtual deification of President Barack Obama in the Canadian media over the past couple of months, that Prime Minister Stephen Harper would exceed expectations when the two men shared a podium (mano a mano so to speak) at their first joint press conference.

Even so, the deftness with which Harper appropriated Obama's agenda Thursday was breathtaking.

Expectations for the PM this week could not have been lower. For months, since the disastrous fall economic statement, he has taken a beating in the media. Plus, let's face it: Here's our dull, stodgy, puffy and pale prime minister, a man with the charisma of shoe leather, up against the electric Obama, he of the rippling abs. Yikes.

Meantime, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and Obama are peas in a pod. Writers, thinkers. They read the same books, share the same friends. They likely have the same favourite cafe in Boston, where they order the same decaf latte. Advance coverage of the visit keyed in, not on whether Ignatieff would capitalize on Obama's reformist aura, but how quickly. How could he not?

Here's how: Harper did it first, in front of way more television cameras. Liberal strategists were no doubt biting their fingernails as the presser began. It's a safe bet they were gnashing their teeth and tearing their hair as it ended.

Climate change

First, climate change. Keep in mind that, until not long ago, Harper and the people around him didn't believe it existed. It's possible that some of them still don't. During the last federal election, as the earnest Stephane Dion exhorted the mob (that's us) to go green, Harper and his senior ministers snickered and tossed stink bombs from the back of the class.

Yesterday Harper let on, with a straight face, that he has been impatiently awaiting the advent of a new administration in Washington, in hopes of implementing his activist, environmentalist agenda. Hypocrisy, the Liberals will cry. True. So? Politics often is about stealing the right ideas at the right time. Finally, Harper is doing that.

On Afghanistan both Harper and Obama were clever. Obama didn't ask for a commitment from Canada to extend the mission beyond its current end date of 2011. Harper pointedly did not say that the mission would end in 2011.

It's clear now that Canada will continue to play an important role in Kandahar post 2011, but that Obama will reframe the entire U.S. effort there in terms of diplomacy and development. Hence, the politically toxic issue of "combat" gradually will move off the table. Canada stays in Afghanistan, but not in a "combat" role. On the ground, nothing will change. Politically, everything changes.

Trade and cross-border issues? Here Harper mustered something that, in any other man, could only be described as passion. Obama made all the usual perfunctory noises about how America must respect its trade agreements. Ho hum. But Harper waxed positively eloquent about how free trade is a boon to both nations. "Nobody should think for a minute that trade between Canada and the U.S. is anything but a benefit," is what he said. Rightly so.

Message sent

The most compelling moment in the exchange came near the end when Harper stated, with unusual force and clarity that, "threats to the United States are threats to Canada." That was a message for the folks in Iowa, Kansas and elsewhere (and their representatives in Congress) who are feeling insular and protectionist at the moment. The message may not resonate down south. But if it doesn't, it won't be Harper's fault.

Harper capped this by holding up the Canada-U.S. relationship -- on trade, in Afghanistan -- as a model for precisely the kind of collaborative global leadership Obama has promised the world. Obama, ever the gracious guest, was left to echo, "Prime Minister Harper is right." And indeed, he was.

Wait for the polls: Harper just put himself back in the game.

[updated Fri Feb 20 08:33:46 EST 2009]

Visit a big win for Harper

By GREG WESTON

OBAMA VISITS OTTAWA: Great images of the prez, including Byward Market walkabout
Sun Media's Elizabeth Thompson blogs highs, lows of Obama visit. Click for her observations.

As Canadian media provided excited saturation coverage of Barack Obama's arrival here yesterday, American network CNN briefly showed the landing of the president's jumbo-jet, and promptly cut away to a report on the guy on trial for throwing his shoes at George Bush.

The U.S. media shrug for the president's visit provided a poignant reality check of life in the shadow of the Yankee elephant, a reminder that even a Canadian drop-in from Obama superhero is a much bigger deal on this side of the border than south of it.

That said, Canada's brief encounter with Obamarama was by all political measures a huge success.

After eight years of the most unpopular president in modern times, simply not having to put up with George W. Bush anymore is enough to send most Canadians dancing into the streets.

But yesterday, the charismatic black president from Illinois stood before reporters at a press conference, and suddenly moved Canada-U.S. relations to a whole new level.

"I love this country," Obama said. "I think we could not have a better friend and ally, so I am going to do everything I can to make sure our relationship is strengthened."

Wow. For a few hours of fly-by diplomacy, it doesn't get much better than that.

Presumably, Obama got what he came for -- pictures of his being cheered by adoring foreigners and generally making nice with America's neighbours.

He also returns to Washington with a new political ally at his back, although it is hard to imagine that was ever in doubt.

But the big winner of the day was definitely Stephen Harper and his Conservative government.

On important trade and economic issues, Harper got all the reassurances he could have expected from the president.

For instance, Obama's commitment to help ease growing trade bottlenecks at the border is always music to Canadian ears.

"I think it is possible for us to balance our security concerns with an open border that continues to encourage this extraordinary trade relationship," the president told reporters at a press conference after the visit.

Obama all but tossed cold water on his presidential campaign promises to renegotiate free trade deals to include rules on cheap labour and dirty industries. Maybe later.

The president also downplayed the so-called "Buy American" provisions in the U.S. economic stimulus package, saying nothing in that massive government spending program would violate the free trade agreements he is no longer tearing up.

On other issues the Harper government is not eager to address anytime soon, Obama threw his new Canadian friend some political lifelines.

For instance, an American reporter asked Harper if his discussions with Obama might prompt Canada to reconsider pulling our combat troops out of Afghanistan in 2011.

Before Harper could answer, Obama jumped in: "I certainly did not press the prime minister on any additional commitments beyond the ones that have already been made."

That allowed Harper to dodge the question which, of course, he did.

But the biggest confrontation averted was over Obama's campaign promises to cut greenhouse gas emissions through measures that could have targeted oil from the Alberta tar sands.

So far, the Harper government has maintained a perfect record of doing nothing meaningful on global warming, and that hasn't changed.

Instead, the big announcement from yesterday's get-together was the two countries have agreed to launch a "dialogue on clean energy."

In other words, tackling global warming with more hot air.

Of course, most important of all political achievements from the visit, the PM had his picture taken all smiles and handshakes with the most powerful and popular politician on the planet.

Chalk one up for Steve.

[updated Fri Feb 20 08:38:11 EST 2009]

Obama gives PM cover on climate

Canada's capital
Feb 20, 2009 04:30 AM

Chantal Hébert

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Stephen Harper emerged from his first meeting with President Barack Obama with precious little light shining between himself and his new American counterpart on issues ranging from the environment to the economy to foreign policy and energy.

That's something that would not have been thought possible only a few months ago, when the gap between Obama's environmental and economical approaches and Harper's policies seemed unbridgeable.

Since then though, the necessities imposed on both of them by the magnitude of the economic downturn have forced them closer together. Harper has had to put water into his Conservative wine on government spending and deficit financing; resuscitating the American economy, rather than climate change, is job one for Obama.

In the circumstances, it will take a while, possibly until after yet another federal election, to know whether the minimalist agreement on climate change concluded between the two yesterday is a harbinger of more ambitious developments to come, and if so, whether they will take place on the front of energy rather than on that of the environment.

In the immediate, their stated intent to enter into a so-called clean-energy dialogue may be enough to buy a pass for the huge carbon footprint of Canada's oil sands and ensure them a choice place in the new administration's efforts toward American energy self-sufficiency.

But from a commitment to jointly exploring new green technologies, there is a long way to go to a North American climate change framework, especially one that has teeth.

If they had wanted to send the message that they were determined to hit the ground running on that particular file, the president and the Prime Minister could have backed their words with the appointment of special envoys. That's the route Canada and the U.S. took when they resolved to deal with acid rain in the 1980s.

Still an optimist looking at the outcome of yesterday's presidential visit could conclude that at least Canada and the United States seem to be looking together in the same direction on climate change.

A realist would add that it remains to be seen what that direction is and, if the destination really is that of a substantial reduction in carbon gas emissions rather than just a mutually beneficial energy pact, at whose pace the two governments will ultimately try to get to it.

Meanwhile, the good news for Harper is that linking up with a popular president stands to buy him some much needed cover on the international scene on climate change and some long sought-after resonance for the Canadian message that other NATO allies have to do more in Afghanistan.

For it is not only in Canada that Harper has an opportunity to piggyback on Obama's popularity.

Looking at various European countries falling over themselves to commit new troops to Afghanistan – Obama's priority combat theatre – over the past week, it is clear that the arrival of the new president is turning political hard sells into palatable decisions in many of the world's capitals.

To the frustration of many Canadians, Obama was seen, but not much heard in public yesterday. But for Harper, who got to bask in the sunshine of a leader more popular than himself all day without being outshone by his guest over the course of their 45-minute joint news conference, it turned out to be the best of all worlds.

Chantal Hébert is a national affairs writer. Her column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.

[updated Fri Feb 20 08:40:37 EST 2009]

Obama spokesmen comment on Ottawa visit

Feb 19, 2009 08:36 PM

A transcript of White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and deputy press secretary Jim Steinberg commenting aboard Air Force One Thursday night on U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Ottawa.

Aboard Air Force One

En Route Andrews Air Force Base

Q Let me ask you, was there -- did you detect any sense -- did you detect any of strain or annoyance on the part of Harper when he talked about, you know, the thickening of the borders under the last administration, when he talked about that finally he felt as like they have a partner on climate change and energy, and that the United States is only now beginning to address these issues?

DEPUTY SECRETARY STEINBERG: You know, there wasn't much talk about the previous administration or what had gone before. I mean, having been in a number of these meetings over the years, I just found the tone really excellent. There was not a kind of narrow focus on little issues. It was really -- it was a very strategic discussion, as you could tell from this, heavily focused on the economy and then next on Afghanistan and Pakistan. And it was really -- you know, from two countries that had common problems, they're looking for common solutions. You just didn't get the kind of smaller-level bilateral kinds of problems; it rarely came up. There was just I think a lot of confidence and a sense that this was a good partnership and that they were very upbeat about the direction that things were going.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/590404

[updated Fri Feb 20 08:50:32 EST 2009]

Harper's shallowness will show up with Obama sooner than later because the facts do not support Harper's lies:

"Perhaps to flatter the President, Mr. Harper invented a most extraordinary justification for Canada's record as the country whose emissions have grown the fastest among advanced industrialized countries.

It was hard, Mr. Harper said yesterday, to make progress in Canada when no willing partner existed in the United States. It turns out by this twisting of history that Canada's terrible record was the fault of Mr. Obama's predecessor, George Bush. Hello?

Emissions actually grew faster in Canada than in the U.S. under Mr. Bush. Canada signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol on climate change; the U.S. did not but still had a slightly better record than Canada.

U.S. states, not Canadian provinces, started banding together to form interstate carbon-trading systems, which some provinces then joined. California, then other states, created tougher vehicle-emissions standards.

The Harper government never once tried to reach a Canadian consensus on reducing emissions. The reduction target the government eventually set – a 20-per-cent drop in emissions by 2020 from 2006 levels – is not considered attainable by any Canadian experts who have studied the policies the Harper government has proposed."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090219.wcosimp20/BNStory/specialComment/home

[updated Fri Feb 20 10:57:32 EST 2009]

Message to Nik: We want a Poll done on how many Canadians want the CRTC to be involved in the Internet. This remember has nothing to do with Telecommunications or Television, you do not need a television to be on the Internet. Take your poll by Province.

[updated Fri Feb 20 11:01:39 EST 2009]

Obama, Harper find common ground on environment

February 20, 2009
John Ward
The Canadian Press

OTTAWA

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama found common environmental ground yesterday agreeing to set up a "clean-energy dialogue'' to fight climate change.

And Harper delivered a backhand at Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, by praising the new president as a leader on the issue.

"I'm quite optimistic that we now have a partner on the North American continent that will provide leadership to the world on the climate-change issue, and I think that's an important development,'' Harper said.

He suggested Canada could have done little while the Bush administration was in office. "It's very hard to have a tough regulatory system here when we are competing with an unregulated economy south of the border."

Harper and Obama's announcement of a dialogue is a small step, but it was promptly welcomed by Alberta, home of the oilsands.

The two leaders said they want to increase cross-border co-operation, share technology and ideas.

"We are establishing a U.S.-Canada clean-energy dialogue which commits senior officials from both countries to collaborate on the development of clean-energy science and technologies that will reduce greenhouse gases and combat climate change,'' Harper said.

Obama has made climate change and clean energy a far greater priority than his predecessor. Getting cabinet members and senior officials from Canada and the United States discussing where to go next is a good start, the U.S. president said.

"This dialogue will move us in the right direction,'' said Obama.

"Increasingly, we have to take into account that the issue of climate change, greenhouse gases, is something that's going to have an impact on all of us.''

Although many have called for a North American cap-and-trade system to regulate greenhouse-gas production, the two leaders said this is not the time for that big a step.

Much has yet to be done in the United States, Obama said. "We have to complete our domestic debate and discussion.''

[updated Fri Feb 20 17:08:08 EST 2009]

The beavertail bilateral

Tim Powers, today at 11:12 AM EST

Stephen Harper proved again yesterday that he is an extremely competent performer on the world stage. He is very good in the international arena and demonstrated, as did Obama, during the press conference that he has a mastery of the complex policy challenges, environmental, economic and foreign, that were thrown at him by the media. For me it was also positive to see the President echo what the Prime Minister has been saying about the importance of getting China and India fully engaged in global environmental initiatives. The Harper malcontents in the environmental movement always seemed to forget the logic of that argument when they went after the PM on Kyoto.

Certainly, I don't want to be smug, as that is something best left to the Liberal Party, but it was pleasing to see all that opposition nonsense about Harper's relationship with Obama being poisoned as a consequence of some misadventures during the American primaries be blown to smithereens. When the Toronto Star editorial board says a Conservative PM did okay then I will call the opposition out for crying wolf on bilateral bitterness. Both Harper and Obama demonstrated they know how to play in the big leagues – good on them for that.

[updated Fri Feb 20 17:23:37 EST 2009]

'A generational opportunity'
Former foreign affairs minister David Emerson on what Barack Obama's visit means for Canada-U.S. relations

Adam Radwanski, globeandmail.com: Mr. Emerson, thanks very much for sharing some insight on this historic occasion. While the tone of this afternoon's joint press conference was friendly, and there was much talk of mutual goals, the most substantive policy development seems to be a "dialogue" on shared environmental policy. Was it reasonable to expect anything more concrete coming out of the first meeting between Prime Minister Harper and President Obama?

David Emerson: I think the most important outcome is to achieve a level of positive chemistry between the Prime Minister and the President. Where the chemistry is good, you have the basis to drive a new vision of the Canada-U.S. relationship as well as collaborative opportunities to pursue joint interest in the geopolitical world.

[updated Fri Feb 20 17:25:48 EST 2009]

THE OBAMA VISIT
'EASY GUY TO LIKE'

The Canadian Press

February 20, 2009

Ottawa -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he and U.S. President Barack Obama spent much of their meeting building up a personal relationship.

Mr. Obama appeared to impress just about everyone during his visit to Ottawa and the Prime Minister was no exception.

In an interview with CBC News last night, Mr. Harper said Mr. Obama is an "easy guy to like and an easy guy to get to know."

Mr. Harper says they talked about major issues such as the crisis in the automotive business and the recession. But they also had personal conversations about their families and were on a first-name basis with each other.

The Globe and Mail

Mr. Harper says that is a great way to find out "what makes the other guy tick."

"It's not just about, 'What are your policies?' But it's also, 'Why do you think the way you do, what are your hopes and aspirations for your own family and, ultimately, for your country?' "

Mr. Harper said that despite the long list of problems facing the U.S., he was struck by how relaxed Mr. Obama appeared.

Mr. Harper said they agreed to talk more about a number of issues, including initiatives on the automotive industry, joint infrastructure programs and energy.

He said the most important element of their talk was on what Mr. Harper called "the big picture stuff." He said they will meet again at upcoming summits and figure out how they can be helpful to each other.

[updated Fri Feb 20 17:32:11 EST 2009]

The US media is not so kind about the visit:
"If Canadians were no fans of Mr. Bush, their conservative leader, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, found in him a kindred philosophical spirit . . . "

The Times noted the substance of the Obama-Harper meeting and the new tone it set but then added:

"If Mr. Obama is not entirely simpatico with Mr. Harper, he may have more in common with Canada's opposition leader, Michael Ignatieff of the Liberal Party.

"Mr. Ignatieff is an author (like Mr. Obama) and a former director of a human rights center at Harvard, where he worked alongside Samantha Power, who advised Mr. Obama on foreign policy during his campaign."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090220.wobamamedia20/BNStory/politics/home

Therein lies the real story....Harper is known as a bush acolyte no matter how he tries to spin it.

[updated Fri Feb 20 18:03:55 EST 2009]

Harper maybe getting cut off at the knees with the announcement of Alberta's mess now surfacing. This is another Tory ideological mess by the far right. Iggy's moves to placate the west will start to see daylight as this disaster in Alberta deepens.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090220.walberta21/BNStory/National/home
Alberta's economy is supposed to improve by next year, according to Finance Minister Iris Evans. However, there is growing concern that the province's financial woes are much worse than the government is saying publicly.

Michael Mazar, a BMO Nesbitt Burns analyst who follows oil-field-services companies in the province, said the government's unemployment forecast is “way out to lunch.”

By Mr. Mazar's calculation, employment is down more than 15,000 in oil-and-gas drill-workers alone this year – and that doesn't count “the guy who works at the quad dealership in Grande Prairie,” he said. “You don't need him any more because the rig workers aren't buying quads. Who knows what the trickle-down effect is, but it's way more than 15,000.”

An analysis by Arc Financial Corp., which has estimated that provincial royalties will fall $5-billion below last year's take, suggests the provincial deficit estimate may also be too rosy.

[updated Sat Feb 21 03:57:15 EST 2009]

Her's another article that almost perfectly describes my thoughts. The only thing the author is wrong about stems around the sentence that Harper is somewhat good when in fact he is a disaster worse than any hurricane can produce.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/590359

Herbert asked whether Obama thought the world was now in the midst of one of those potential historical moments. Obama answered: "Yes, I firmly believe that."

Ignatieff could talk like that. Harper can't. That's why I believe that Ignatieff is on track to become our next prime minister.

Harper is a very good, second-tier prime minister. He's smart, composed and not afraid to make tough decisions.

But he simply hasn't got what it takes to be a first-tier leader. Few commentators would ever sum up their impressions of him as did Herbert about Obama: "He is intelligent, mature, thoughtful, calm in the face of criticism, and, if the nation is lucky, maybe even wise."

Potentially, Ignatieff could attract some of the same kind of praise, although "mature" wouldn't be on the list since his life experiences lack the range and richness of Obama's.

Intelligence, of course, and thoughtfulness (if still a bit too much the academic agonizing), and calmness. Early on, he made a lot of mistakes. That he survived them seems to have given him something of Obama's cool.

Ignatieff has one asset Obama lacked. This is that Obama broke the trail for him while he himself had to overcome the handicap of being intelligent and thoughtful – this, in contemporary politics, being the same as being accused of being an elitist egghead.

Because of Obama, brains have become the new chic.

[updated Sat Feb 21 04:18:14 EST 2009]

The leader that was not a leader, the honeymoon is ending, fear runs rampant as Harper delivers for Ontario! Another failed liberal on the defensive.

John Ivison: Ignatieff happy to go with the flow
Posted: February 20, 2009, 7:03 PM by Ronald Nurwisah
Canadian politics, John Ivison
Michael Ignatieff visited the Canadian Labour Congress last week, where he had a private meeting with some of the top union representatives in the country.

According to one person familiar with what took place, the Liberal leader was assailed for his decision not to bring down the government and become prime minister.

Mr. Ignatieff defended himself by pledging categorically that he would not vote for another Conservative budget, the source said.

Neither the Liberal camp nor the CLC would confirm the exchange, but if it took place as reported, it raises an interesting question about Mr. Ignatieff’s leadership, beyond the obvious point that he plans to bring down the government within the next 12 months. Just how tough is Michael Ignatieff? Since becoming Liberal leader, he has displayed a worrying tendency to tell people exactly what they want to hear. Take his trip out West last week, where he said the coalition’s demise was due to his fear of stoking Western outrage. He said the Liberals have tended to run against the West to boost support elsewhere and that this trend had to stop. He denounced the Liberals’ National Energy Program and defended the oil sands, although, to be fair, he has even done this in Montreal.

There are other examples where the Liberal leader has avoided confrontation by taking the easy option. In his meeting with President Barack Obama, he seemed to suggest that if the new U.S. strategy in Afghanistan works, he might be open to extending Canadian military involvement. “You can’t get us to re-up in a situation of strategic incoherence,” he said he told Mr. Obama — the implication appearing to be that this could change, if the strategy becomes more coherent.

Or how about his decision to give a “one-time” pass to six Newfoundland and Labrador MPs to break party ranks and vote against the budget, a decision that led to accusations he was fostering regional over national interests? Critics pointed out that even Stéphane Dion acted when a caucus member broke solidarity, expelling MP Joe Comuzzi from caucus.

There is no doubt that Mr. Ignatieff has united his party and given Canadians the sense there is a prospective government in waiting. But leaders know the way and show the way, even when the going gets tough. Recent history suggests that’s right about the time Mr. Ignatieff gets going — shifting his position on issues such as the Iraq war and a carbon tax when it became politically expedient to do so.

Mr. Harper has not exactly been a model of consistency in recent months, but he has proven over the long haul that on issues from the taxing of income trusts to the Quebec-as-a-nation motion, he has made tough decisions, faced up to his critics and argued them down.

Michael Ignatieff may be a “smart set intellectual,” as The New York Times says, but does he have what it takes to make the tough decisions?

National Post
jivison@nationalpost.com

Photo: Sure he looks tough, but Iggy will tell you what you want to hear. (Christine Muschi/Reuters)

[updated Sat Feb 21 09:21:05 EST 2009]

U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper speak at a press conference in Ottawa on Thursday.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he and U.S. President Barack Obama agreed Thursday to co-operate to battle a global recession, and develop new policies to fight climate change.

Mr. Harper made the comments in Ottawa Thursday at a joint press conference with Mr. Obama, during the new president's first foreign trip since taking office.

The two leaders pledged that both nations will begin a new effort to develop clean-energy technology.

The accord will commit the countries to working together on developing ways for capturing and storing carbon dioxide as well as building a so-called smart power grid, they said.

"We can't afford to tackle these issues in isolation," Mr. Obama said.

In their opening statements, Messrs. Obama and Harper said they discussed measures both governments are taking to deal with a global recession. Mr. Obama said they also discussed diplomacy and the fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama arrived in the Canadian capital this morning, making his first foreign trip as president. Before arriving, Mr. Obama said the U.S. and Canada should work together to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions.

A collaboration between the U.S. and its biggest trading partner on finding the technology to capture and store carbon dioxide would "be good for everybody," Mr. Obama said Feb. 17 in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

The issue is important to Canada as it seeks to expand development of oil from tar sands. The oil is separated from sand and clay with intense heat in a process that releases more greenhouse gases than pumping conventional crude.

The U.S., the world's largest economy, and Canada, the eighth-biggest, both are mired in recessions. Canada's unemployment rate in January rose to a four-year high of 7.2%. In the U.S., the jobless rate was 7.6%, the highest since 1992.

[updated Sat Feb 21 10:34:46 EST 2009]

The GG got an invite to Washington but the lame duck PM did not. that tells us something else about Harper's shortened lifespan as the worst PM ever...even the worst of the second tier ones.

http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/591020

[updated Sat Feb 21 11:55:13 EST 2009]

Tories act quickly to keep ball rolling
...
Ministers to follow up on Obama visit

By Mike Blanchfield, Canwest News ServiceFebruary 21, 2009

Mr. Steinberg's account is good news because it shows the Obama administration sees Canada as a "serious" country, said Colin Robertson, a trade-policy expert from Carleton University who spent several years in Washington as a senior envoy.

"These are all heavyweights. And they left with a pretty positive impression."

Mr. Steinberg's blow-by-blow of Thursday's meetings revealed that Mr. Harper and his ministers succeeded in not sounding like a bunch of complainers, even though they faced some serious trade issues, such as a clogged border and the recent controversy over Buy-American provisions in the U.S. stimulus package.

"You just didn't get the kind of smaller-level bilateral kinds of problems; it rarely came up," said Mr. Steinberg.

"There was just, I think, a lot of confidence and a sense that this was a good partnership and that they were very upbeat about the direction that things were going."

Mr. Steinberg made it clear that Canada won't face a request any time soon to keep their troops in Afghanistan beyond the 2011 withdrawal deadline.

"The commitment up to 2011 is a much longer-term commitment than anybody else has given us," he said. "Many of the other allies have only got, you know, existing commitments for six months to a year."

Mr. Robertson said sustaining the momentum will be challenging. In particular, the ball is now in Canada's court to marshal a coherent position on the greenhouse-gas emissions that takes into account disparate positions of various provinces, business and environmental groups.

To that end, while Mr. Obama and Mr. Harper were talking, several other key meetings were unfolding.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty spoke with Mr. Obama's chief economic adviser, Larry Summers; Mr. Prentice met with Carol Browner, the White House energy and climate co-ordinator; Mr. Cannon consulted with Jim Jones, Mr. Obama's national security adviser.

[updated Sat Feb 21 13:02:18 EST 2009]

PS faces 'major test' in handling stimulus money

Bureaucrats must follow rules, but get funds out quickly

By Kathryn May, The Ottawa CitizenFebruary 21, 2009

The Conservative promise to inject $40 billion in new spending and tax cuts into the economy over two years to stage a recovery in 2010 is the bureaucracy's biggest public management test in decades.

Federal public servants have never been asked to push so much money out the door so fast, nor have they worked under the thumb of so many rules and spending watchdogs.

But there's little sympathy for bureaucrats these days and that antipathy only adds to the pressure on a public service racing to get billions of dollars flowing to projects that will jolt the economy and create jobs.

"The pressure on the public service is palpable right now," said David Mitchell, president of the Public Policy Forum. "It's a major test of the responsiveness of the government sector and it's not going to be easy because if the economy worsens, we know where the fingers will be pointed." Mr. Mitchell said the public service is accountable for every dollar that's spent and is expected to get money to shovel-ready projects as fast as possible.

"These competing pressures put the public service in such a dilemma." Treasury Board officials say the government recognizes the problem and is taking steps to speed up the time to get programs approved and and money flowing.

Buried in the budget is the creation of a "stimulus accountability framework" to balance the "effective stewardship" of tax dollars and "speed of implementation." The budget bill creates an immediate pool of $4 billion that can be used for "large priority projects." The job is next to impossible if Canada's public servants follow all the rules, controls, protocols and processes that have been piled on them over the years, especially those enshrined in the Conservatives' signature Federal Accountability Act.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/faces+major+test+handling+stimulus+money/1313726/story.html

[updated Sat Feb 21 13:14:40 EST 2009]

Iggy trying to silence critics he is ignoring women in his party.

Michael Ignatieff appoints Joyce Murray as liaison to B.C. government
By Charlie Smith

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has found a way to keep Vancouver Quadra MP Joyce Murray busy for a while.

Today (February 20), Ignatieff named Murray as the caucus intergovernmental liaison to the B.C. government.

Murray was a cabinet minister in the Gordon Campbell government from 2001 to 2005. In a news release, she claimed that the Harper government has “mishandled its relationship with the federation”.

Murray was a strong supporter of former Liberal leader Stephane Dion. Ignatieff didn't appoint her or two other Vancouver Liberal MPs, Ujjal Dosanjh and Hedy Fry, to the Liberal shadow cabinet last month.

After the B.C. media made an issue of this, Ignatieff named Dosanjh as chair of the party’s new intergovernmental liaison secretariat.

Murray is also vice-chair of the Commons health committee and chairs the Liberal reform and renewal caucus.

I pointed out earlier this month that only nine of the 33 members of Ignatieff’s shadow cabinet are women. Perhaps by boosting Murray’s profile, Ignatieff is trying to silence criticism about how women are being treated in his caucus.

There's one thing, however, that he might not have considered. There's a reasonable chance that Carole James and the NDP will win the B.C. election in May. And the New Democrats might not look kindly at the prospect of Ignatieff's liaison being one of Campbell's most loyal former cabinet ministers.
http://www.straight.com/article-202683/michael-ignatieff-appoints-joyce-murray-liaison-bc-government

[updated Sat Feb 21 13:18:05 EST 2009]

Harper Should Get An Honorary Oscar This Weekend For Most Shameful Performance.

This doesn't happen very often as my friends can attest but our Prime Minister's recent comments on the environment, at the joint Obama-Harper press conference, left me speechless.

I haven't ever heard a bigger load of bull. Harper rejoiced over the fact that he NOW has a willing partner in Washington to address environmental issues. Too bad he forgot to mention that his government, like the Bush Administration, was not itself seriously credible on environmental questions.

Andrew Coyne said he threw Bush under the bus. He sure did. Perhaps our concerned citizen and environmental activist PM can explain to us why we are still waiting for the Harper government to implement its own environmental regulations. I suppose that is also W's fault -- after all, Harper also did make some noise about a previous lack of progress in bilateral regulation.

The press really blew it this time. Remember when Paul Martin said with a straight face that Belinda did not receive a quid pro quo for bolting to the Liberals. Remember the spontaneous laughter that erupted from the national press theatre...this new verbal work of fiction by the PM should have had that one beat by a country mile. The impudence of the man.

[updated Sat Feb 21 13:25:49 EST 2009]

Hillary Clinton makes her first mistake appeasing China on Human Rights, this is the time to press hard. 20 million Chinese unemployment, only a matter of time for the Thugs in Beijing, No trade with China. No more Chinese students taking up space in Canadian Universities this includes Hong Kong also. Up to you to educate your own China, Wasted money on Militrary, We do not want your tainted money. Is that clear!

Anti China Movement

[updated Sat Feb 21 14:11:20 EST 2009]

"Canadian" Please Stop Crying.

I know you're crushed. It must be quite a bitter pill to swallow but remember we are no longer in the salad days of Stephen Harper.

You'll get over it, eventually. We know, we know, how you said Barack hated Michael and couldn't possibly stand to be in the same room with him for more than a measly ten minutes. No cameras, you said.

So they met with Bob in tow for 30 minutes -- only three minutes short of the PM's time. Must be driving you nuts I'll bet.

Come on, buck up. Cheer up. They'll be better days ahead. Now get out there, put those rose-coloured glasses back on and get back to work doing what only you do best.

Score another touchdown for Stephen. If you see him, give him a little hug. I've got a feeling he could use one, just about now.

[updated Sat Feb 21 14:57:15 EST 2009]

A Bit Of Advice For Lawrence Cannon.

Washington must be all a twitter knowing that the PM and his A Team have significant plans to invade the U.S. in the coming days and weeks.

Harper will be in the U.S. on Monday and Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon arrives on Tuesday to meet Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Lawrence, it might be a good idea not to accept any unexpected gifts from the Americans while you're down there. You know -- large crates or unexpected passengers suddenly and forcefully destined for your Challenger!

By all means, keep the aircraft securely locked on the tarmac. You wouldn't want to have to make your way back to Ottawa with a gift that just keeps on giving...the Prime Minister will want to be in a good mood upon your return. A wise man knows when and how to take his precautions.

[updated Sat Feb 21 15:12:42 EST 2009]

the upsurge in support for Iggy has become more apparent with the closing of applications to attend the convention last night.

Our esteemed friend Alice/canadian /informed 1 was going off at the mouth saying they were having troubles getting people to attend. As it turns out they will need election type meetings in many many ridings where many more than 20 people applied. In my riding there are over 40 applicants. final numbers are not available but the hall will be full!!!

Another tory wet dream down the tubes.

[updated Sat Feb 21 16:01:34 EST 2009]

Do all the Idiots migrate to Ottawa for jobs in the Government prefect case in point is this National Capital Commission. It is no wonder Canadians across Canada get fed up! No matter what government is in power, the idiots get to keep their jobs when they should be fired like other Canadians so from time to time! We need a Poll of how many Idiots actually live in Ottawa.!

[updated Sat Feb 21 17:07:15 EST 2009]

Strategic Voting.

For a change of pace, I just finished reading Alice Funke's piece on strategic voting. She points out that past electoral voter behaviour has proven itself not to be a good predictor of future voting patterns.

She makes a solid point about hidden agendas and how that can impact crunching the numbers.

I'll quote part of her argument:

"...more of the seats that changed hands in an election had previously been won by margins of more than 5%, than had been won with margins under 5%..."

As someone who has voted strategically in the past based on Joe Clark's theory of the devil you know versus the devil you don't, at all political levels, my questions would be as follows:

The statistics seem to suggest, if I'm interpreting them correctly, that wide range voter volatility is a better predictor of ultimate election outcome. In other words, when a political wave is generated and hits, nothing can stop it. Is this correct?

Another question: if a wave is indeed generated, doesn't that mean that the wave itself is a clear representation of strategic voting at its best, at its most efficient electorally-speaking? To my mind, it seems you can't have one without the other.

Please elaborate. Thank you.

[updated Sat Feb 21 17:23:31 EST 2009]

I agree

Tim Powers, today at 12:21 PM EST

John Ivison's article in today's National Post about say-everything-stand-for-nothing Michael Igantieff proves he is morphing into your typical Liberal leader.

Generally, that approach has worked for Liberals but will it now -- given the times in which we live?

Being a parrot of platitudes, bumpf and telling people what they want to hear all the time may not be the way back to power for the Big Red Machine.

Critics can rightly point out the Conservative Party has moved around on an issue or two. But as John says in his piece: "Mr. Harper has not exactly been a model of consistency in recent months, but he has proven over the long haul that on issues from the taxing of income trusts to the Quebec-as-a-nation motion, he has made tough decisions, faced up to his critics and argued them down."

For a once-high-profile public intellectual, Mr. Ignatieff has, since becoming Liberal leader, come across no better than a vapid ward boss.

[updated Sat Feb 21 20:38:01 EST 2009]

POLITICS
TheStar.com | Insight | Is Obama a closet conservative?
Is Obama a closet conservative?

Feb 21, 2009 04:30 AM

Thomas Walkom

Canadians going gaga over Barack Obama need to get a grip. He is not going to change the world. He is not going to right all wrongs. Indeed, his whirlwind visit to Ottawa this week underlines the new U.S. president's innate conservatism.

Take the one concrete measure that came out of his Thursday meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper – a Canada-U.S. decision to look into carbon capture as a solution to global warming.

This does not signify Harper's willingness to endorse an Obama-sponsored get-tough approach to climate change. Rather, it represents the opposite – Obama's willingness to sign on to Harper's search (much criticized by Canadian environmentalists) for a miraculous new technology that would allow oil refineries and coal plants to keep polluting and then permanently store the resultant carbon emissions underground.

The U.S. president, in a veiled criticism of the Kyoto Accord on climate change, also noted that no solution to global warming can be found unless China and India are drawn in.

This has been Harper's position all along. It was also that of former U.S. president George W. Bush.

None of this is to say that Obama is Bush redux. He isn't. But the differences between the two have been greatly overdrawn.

The war on terror: Obama isn't backing away from Bush's decision to define terrorism as war, a crucial label that gives the president constitutional authority to operate with few Congressional constraints. The key difference is that the new president wants to shift the focus of that war to Afghanistan.

True, he has changed its parameters by ordering the Guantanamo Bay prison closed. He's also banned the use of torture by U.S. officials.

But at the same time, his administration has quietly indicated that it plans to continue the practice of so-called extraordinary rendition: capturing suspected terrorists anywhere in the world and shipping them off to countries such as Egypt to be tortured.

And Obama is continuing to use national security as an excuse to keep those that have been illegally incarcerated from getting redress in U.S. courts.

As for Afghanistan, Obama is working on a new strategy that he'll reveal soon. We'll find out then what he wants Canada to do.

But, like Bush, he is continuing to widen the war by bombing suspected Taliban targets in Pakistan.

The economic crisis: Obama's $787 billion (U.S.) stimulus package of tax cuts and government spending is almost certainly different from anything Bush might have devised.

But a parallel $2 trillion (U.S.) attempt to solve the financial crisis is more Bushian. While Obama is willing to lavish unprecedented amounts of public money on the U.S. financial system, like Bush he seems congenitally unwilling to give taxpayers a role in determining how these funds are used.

Instead, his various schemes – including this week's $275 billion (U.S.) mortgage bailout plan – involve attempts to bribe private financiers, through so-called incentive payments, to act in the public interest.

Obama is even planning to offer billions in subsidies to the very hedge funds that provoked the current crisis, in the hope that this time they'll use the money well.

Oddly enough, even Harper's Conservative government is more willing to endorse direct state intervention in financial markets. It has given $200 billion to crown corporations such as Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation, Export Development Canada and the Business Development Bank to do just that.

Canada-U.S. relations: The basic bargain made after 9/11 still holds – Ottawa takes account of American security concerns; in return, Washington recognizes Canada's need for access to U.S. markets.

That's what Harper was talking about when, at a press conference Thursday, he veered into an impassioned soliloquy on Canada's commitment to border security.

Obama says he still wants to write labour and environmental safeguards into the main North American Free Trade Agreement. We'll see how far he pushes that. It's worth noting, though, that Harper has dropped the apocalyptic language he once used when this topic came up.

For Harper, however, the real benefit of an Obama presidency goes beyond specifics such as trade. It is that Obama's popularity here makes it easier for his government to align itself with the U.S. on an entire range of issues – from drug regulation to defence.

Indeed, those who used to call the prime minister a Bush sycophant missed the point. As this week's events demonstrate, Harper is willing to fawn over any U.S. president.

Like his predecessors Paul Martin and Brian Mulroney, this prime minister wants Canada cemented more firmly into America's orbit – regardless of who is in the White House – in the hope that this will produce economic rewards....

[updated Sat Feb 21 20:56:54 EST 2009]

Liberals are disgusted with the hawk Iggy calling for a longer mission!

Ignatieff Backtracks On Afghanistan
February 20, 2009, 9:12 am
Filed under: Democratizing the Liberal Party | Tags: Afghanistan, Ignatieff, neoconservative, Obama

We know Ignatieff was in favour of Bush’s war in Iraq. But now he has softened the Liberal Party’s stand on Afghanistan and may support an extended military mission. He would not commit the Liberal Party to voting against an extended stay if Obama convinces Harper to bring forward such a motion in the House of Commons. Instead, when asked about it Ignatieff said,

“We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”

Everyone knows he’s a neoconservative on issues like this and would love to stay in Afghanistan. Perhaps the budget will not be the only Ignatieff-Harper Coalition. It’s obvious Ignatieff would love a coalition position with Harper on Afghanistan.

Another interesting quote from Ignatieff was,

“I’ve said clearly that our party’s position currently is that the military phase of the mission ends in 2011.” (Emphasis mine.)

How is it clear when you qualify it like that? It shows that Ignatieff obviously would like to change the Party’s current position. We’ll see if the caucus tows the line on something like this. If he were Prime Minister it would be easier for him to get his way because he’d have more carrots and sticks to keep the caucus in line.

[updated Sat Feb 21 21:24:53 EST 2009]

Ignatieff adrift

I agree with Conservative Reporter - This was Stephen Harper’s day.

Some may say he basked in the reflected glory of President Obama, but he held his own and then some in the afternoon presser. His remarks about the thickening border and Canada’s concerns about terrorism were some of the finest ever delivered by a Canadian Prime Minister, IMHO.

John Geddes seems to share my pleasure in our Prime Minister’s performance:

…Harper generally sounded confident in the news conference. He spoke at length, and seemed to warm up as he went along. To my ear, his most forceful remarks came late—and pretty much required a reaction from Obama.

The Prime Minister was talking about border security when he shifted rhetorical gears, from addressing the press to more broadly speaking to Americans.

“I just want to make this clear to our American friends,” Harper said in a tone that began to sound rather stern. “The view of this government is unequivocal: threats to the United States are threats to Canada.”

He went on, taking aim, although without saying so, at persistent American notions of Canada as somehow soft on terrorism. “We as Canadians have every incentive to be as cooperative and alarmed about the threats that exist to the North American continent as do the government and the people of the United States.”

Listening to this, and taking in Harper’s urgent tone, Obama evidently felt challenged to say something about it. At this point, he sounded like he was genuinely reacting to Harper, rather than speaking along predetermined lines, or using phrases he had recited many times before.

“Let me just say, to echo what the Prime Minister said, we have no doubt about Canada’s commitment to security in the United States as well as in Canada,” Obama said. “Obviously we’ve got long-lasting relationships, around Norad, for example. The same is true with respect to border security. There’s been extraordinary cooperation and we expect that that will continue.”

The words weren’t dramatic, but they did grow out of the moment. I’m not sure if this will amount to much, but I do know Harper has been preoccupied with border “thickening” for well over a year. He had been frustrated by his inability to get the George W. Bush administration to seriously address the way security measures are slowing trade and travel. Today’s press conference exchange on the matter now ensures that Obama didn’t leave Ottawa without realizing Harper’s frustration on this file…

Michael Ignatieff’s self-obsessed performance was a stark contrast to that of our Prime Minister’s. Iggy’s discussion about Omar Khadr and how a Liberal government would proceed was in appallingly bad taste for such an occasion.

However, what I found most puzzling was his remarks about Afghanistan. In a CBC interview (link above) we learn the following:

Ignatieff said he told the president he felt Canada is “adrift strategically” in Afghanistan. The president “laughed and said ‘we feel the same way in the White House.’”

O.K. That is strange enough. Does President Obama feel that Canada is not doing a good job in Afghanistan? Are we incompetent? Or was the President merely trying to make a joke or put Iggy at ease?

But in the CTV interview Iggy seems to suggest that it was President Obama who brought up the subject and expressed ‘a marked concern with strategic deterioration in the sense that the mission is drifting’, and that Iggy then said that ‘he felt it was drifting too.’

So which was it? And if President Obama was so concerned with the way Canada is handling Afghanistan, why didn’t he raise these concerns with the Prime Minister?

So Iggy either screwed up, or he revealed a confidence that should never have been bragged about on national television.

And this is why the Conservative party doesn’t need to run attack ads.

Iggy’s doing it all pro bono.

* * * *

Update: Sammy mentioned in a previous post that it was also very partisan of Ignatieff to complain to President Obama “about the difficulties we’ve had working with the Harper government.” (Source)

Now that I think about it, it is very curious - and juvenile. What the heck did he think President Obama could possibly do about it anyway?

Tattletale.

[updated Sat Feb 21 21:45:58 EST 2009]

My weekly report from some well placed Liberals tells me they are doing just fine with Iggy at the helm.

He is fund raising up a storm, the polls are good and getting better and the convention is going to be oversold.

Unlike the lies being spread here by Alice in wonderland the facts are solid and the Liberals are in bloom.

[updated Sun Feb 22 00:31:56 EST 2009]

This post is too long but clearly the Host of the Agenda is having difficulty with Warren Kinsella attempts to allow the TVO host to run his own show.

Shaidle, Kinsella, and More
Posted on: 20 February 2009 by Steve Paikin

"So, having now read all of your posts on last Thursday’s program, I thought I’d do what I could in this space to shed some light on how we do what we do.

So if Warren’s ultimate goal was to deprive Kathy of a “platform,” his approach failed spectacularly.
.....

Throughout the course of the day, Warren and I emailed back and forth a few times. Much to my surprise, I found my private emails to him quoted on his blog. I found that to be a violation of etiquette and surprising for someone who, I would imagine, understands the value of private conversation."

.....

http://www.tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/theagenda/index.cfm?page_id=3&action=blog&subaction=viewpost&blog_id=43&post_id=9506

[updated Sun Feb 22 08:06:39 EST 2009]

Saturday, February 21, 2009
What Is Up With The Lefties?
Seriously, I'm used to posters on this blog getting emotional and name calling, on both sides of the aisle, that's why comment moderation is on, but what's up with the lefties?

We have Iffy pretending to be the Prime Minister of Canada by having his picture with Obama on a Times Square gumbo tron, hoping for American votes next election I guess.

Iggy's Times Square coup
Posted By ELIZABETH ELIZABETH THOMPSON THOMPSON, SUN MEDIA

All in all, the PR coup cost the Liberals $1,100 for U. S. distribution, $300 for the high-definition picture and $500 to distribute the photo to Canadian media outlets.

"We wanted to be sure that media had an opportunity to see that he did meet with the president," said Liberal spokesman Jill Fairbrother,

Dimitri Soudas, the prime minister's spokesman, said Harper doesn't have to buy advertising to get coverage.

"I guess Mr. Ignatieff is still more preoccupied with getting coverage in the United States rather than in Canada, where he has actually come back after 36 long years of being absent."

http://www.thebarrieexaminer.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1445184&auth=ELIZABETH%20ELIZABETH%20THOMPSON%20THOMPSON,%20SUN%20MEDIA

Well Elizabeth Elizabeth Thompson Thompson, maybe maybe you you should proof read your own article. Just a thought!

Then we have some sort of Catsella attacking everybody from bloggers to TV show hosts.

I love it: Steve Paikin makes a pathetic mockery of an Ignatieff crony's crude attempt to censor TVO

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/02/21/i-love-it-steve-paikin-makes-a-pathetic-mockery-of-an-ignatieff-crony-s-crude-attempt-to-censor-tvo.aspx

Now, it turns out there's another reason to respect Paikin: He stands up to windbag bullies who attempt to censor his show — even windbag bullies who work for Michael Ignatieff and try to pull strings with higher-up in the Ontario government. You can read Blazing Cat Fur for a very good summary. But I also suggest you read Paikin's own blog entry on the subject (which I have pasted in below), in which he describes the obnoxious tactics a certain Ignatieff strategist applies in a crude, unsuccessful attempt to censor the Feb. 12 installment of The Agenda.

[updated Sun Feb 22 09:27:22 EST 2009]

A Message For Parnel.

I want to start out by saying how much I respect and yes, admire your longstanding personal commitment to the Liberal Party of Canada. Yours are strongly held views close to your heart. Like myself, you are a born fighter who thrives in the political arena. In short, a natural.

Please allow me to give you a word of advice. When next you reappear which I personally hope will be soon -- please put a little water in your wine - that is all that seems to be expected from you. Is that really too much to ask?

This might seem somewhat rich coming from me (which is probably right) but then again it is important to have your continuing contribution here. We Liberals need you here. I do what I can but I'm neither official nor able to spread myself as thinly as would be required to combat alone the ever increasing Conservative onslaught on this blog.

I like you Parnel. Hell I must be really slipping when I confess some admiration for Canadian. Like us, she is a real fighter. That gets her some points in my book. But not too many!

In the future, please take a few well deserved breaths when posting and get back into the game.

[updated Sun Feb 22 13:12:57 EST 2009]

Canada had a good day on Thursday

So much of our economic health depends on good vibes with Americans

By NORMAN WEBSTER, The GazetteFebruary 22, 2009 9:01 AM

Barack Obama's visit to Ottawa might have been short, but its results were as sweet as Canadians could have hoped. Forget the U.S.-Canada "clean energy dialogue" and the rest; what counts in meetings like this is the rapport leaders build up between themselves.

This influences their future decisions - and, just as important, sends signals to cabinet members, deputy ministers, security advisers, assistant deputy ministers, congressional allies, generals, aides, speech-writers and deputy assistant deputy ministers, right down to lowly customs officers. If the president says, "I like this guy (Canada's PM), let's see what we can do to help him out," whole platoons of Washington insiders will find a sudden fascination for Canadian affairs. Even normally surly border guards will practice their smiles before going on duty.
...

http://www.montrealgazette.com/Business/Canada+good+Thursday/1316501/story.html

[updated Sun Feb 22 13:36:24 EST 2009]

Hardly two peas in a pod

Obama and Harper – Very different men
by Richard Cléroux

Barack Obama and Stephen Harper Obama and Harper – Very different men
Poor Harper. He didn’t quite cut the same figure as Barack Obama.
Canadians are used to having prime ministers who can stand up to their American counterparts.

Compare Pierre Trudeau’s brains to what Richard Nixon had. “No contest.”

Brian Mulroney may not have made as many movies as Ronald Reagan but he knew how to make a speech without having to read a script.

Jean Chrétien was a better golfer than Bill Clinton, but Clinton had hidden talents.

The week we saw Harper up against Obama and the difference was obvious from the first moment on. Harper wanted to avoid the crowds and head to his private office. Obama insisted on going back out to wave to the crowds that had gathered.

When they walked together, Obama took big easy strides and appeared confident looking up and down at the marble work in the corridor. Harper appeared fidgety, and waddled along beside him like a duck out of water.

The difference is reflected in the popularity polls. The latest poll shows 82% of Canadians approve of Obama’s handling of the economy, while only 26% of Canadians agree with how Harper is handling things.

The image we still have of Harper on the economy goes back to the leaders’ debate in the last election when Harper sat motionless and silent, a smile plastered on his face, while Gilles Duceppe, Jack Layton and Stéphane Dion hammered Harper on the economy.

Image is everything for Harper. Who else has his own hairdresser, Michelle Muntean, paid out of public funds, who follows him around everywhere making sure every hair on his head is in place for that special ‘helmet-head’ look he wants. Obama wears his hair cut short, so short he doesn’t need a comb, never mind a hairdresser.

Harper is cold and predictable. Everything he does is planned ahead of time, right down to the last detail. He’s the kind of guy who seeing off his 12-year old son, would shake hands with him rather than giving him a hug.

Obama is forever giving his young daughters big hugs and taking them into his arms. He relishes adventure. As his limousine was leaving for the airport, Obama insisted on a quick side-trip to the Byward Market in Ottawa to buy cookies and a snow-globe for his daughters. He ordered a Beaver Tail (pancake deep-fried and rolled in sugar and cinnamon with maple syrup on it.)

When asked if he’d ever had Beaver Tail before, Obama replied no, but added they had something in Chicago that filled the arteries just as easily.

Harper can be forgiven for not having Obama’s charisma. Few politicians in either country have. But being petty and mean-spirited is another matter.

Afraid of being outshone by Governor-General Michaëlle Jean and Liberal Leader Ignatieff, Harper tried his best to prevent their meetings with Obama while he was here.

Unable to block the meetings Harper tried to ban cameras and press coverage, Mme Jean put her foot down and issued her own invitation to the news media to attend her meeting.

Harper did score a few points during the Obama visit. Rather than contradicting Obama during their news conference, Harper quickly re-interpreted Obama’s commitments in Canada’s favour.

When Obama pledged stronger measures against greenhouse gases and dirty oil and coal Harper pretended that he has been in favour of the Kyoto Accord all along.

Those of us who still have memory will remember Harper once called Kyoto “a socialist plot” and his repeated attacks on it during recent years.

Now it seems Harper is all in favour of Obama’s Green Shift – it takes skill to switch like that—and Harper is even ready to attend the post-Kyoto summit in Copenhagen in 2011.

Obama just looked at Harper and smiled. Not so stupid this fellow, Obama must have thought.

Two really different guys.

[updated Sun Feb 22 14:09:38 EST 2009]

Obama invites Michaëlle Jean to Washington not Harper

Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–Governor General Michaëlle Jean discussed the plight of her native Haiti with U.S. President Barack Obama, who invited her to come to Washington – an invitation that was not extended to Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Obama told Jean he wants to return to Canada with his family. "He told her he would like to see her again," Blouin said.

"And he said to her that he would love to see her in Washington as well."

It was clear Canada's first black governor general and Obama, the first black American president, hit it off. They beamed as they strode down a red carpet together.

At one point, cameras captured Jean tossing back her head in laughter. "At that moment she was telling him that she felt it was like a love affair between him and Canadians," Blouin said later.

"He said to her that he knew that, that he'd been informed that he was very popular in Canada. Then he joked and he added, `Well, it's good to know because if things do not go well for me in the States, I know I can come to Canada.'

"That's why she was laughing so much."

The Harper government spokesperson told reporters Thursday that Obama had not invited Harper to Washington at this time and their next meeting would be the international G20 and NATO meetings in April in Europe.

U.S. media reports on the visit were positive, focusing on Obama's stated affection for America's biggest trading partner during his first foreign trip as president.

Time magazine reported that the president expressed "an unprecedented depth of emotion for Canada, where Obama has a higher approval rating than any domestic politician."

Harper not invited. Obama knows what Harper is like, he's not stupid.

[updated Sun Feb 22 14:20:42 EST 2009]

Why signing an agreement with the Bloc by the Liberals will hurt them outside Quebec. Here is an example of 2 recent stories.

'Let's get to work' on building a country: PQ leader
By Kevin Dougherty, Montreal GazetteFebruary 21, 2009
http://www.canada.com/news/work+building+country+leader/1315888/story.html

Sarkozy lauds united Canada
'Close friend'; French leader awards Charest Légion d'honneur
By PETER O'NEIL, Canwest News ServiceFebruary 3, 2009
http://www.montrealgazette.com/Life/Sarkozy+lauds+united+Canada/1246263/story.html

[updated Sun Feb 22 14:23:00 EST 2009]

http://1anxiousliberal.wordpress.com/

Here is a Liberal Blogger who I have been reading for another viewpoint. He is not a fan of Harper or Iggy. It is an interesting Blog.

Fortress Toronto Crumbling For Liberals
February 22, 2009, 10:00 am
Filed under: Democratizing the Liberal Party

Mark my words, the Toronto Liberal fortress is about to crumble under Ignatieff. Not all of it is his fault, the Tories have been working hard as well. We’re going to lose ethnic votes and votes on the right to Harper. And Ignatieff’s neoconservative policies will lose us votes to the NDP. They are going to hammer us with his positions and it will hurt. I have no doubt we will win the most seats in Toronto, but the fortress will be gone next election.

[updated Sun Feb 22 14:53:36 EST 2009]

In the coming weeks we will embark on a new look at our Federal government, we will pick a Civil Servant to critic. The first one is [EDITED BY MODERATOR], Do you know him and what qualifications does he bring to the table, that you and I cannot provide. His department is Citizenship and Immigration. Why can we not get these people to do some work.

Pregnant Tourists should not be allowed into country at the entry point to become citizens and new [EDITED BY MODERATOR] on our many social programs. Who isn't doing their job. This is not exactly a difficult problem. Why are you coming here Pregnant woman go back home to [EDITED BY MODERATOR] or [EDITED BY MODERATOR]! [EDITED BY MODERATOR] have abused many of our laws, but they still complain about not being accepted as Canadians, well this is not difficult to figure out!

[updated Sun Feb 22 15:46:38 EST 2009]

This is the problem with Ottawa especially the Civil Servants they are so busy protecting themselves they cannot do any work for Canadians. The place and the City are a mess. Why has Nik never picked up on this fact! We want to know Nik or are you protecting yourself also!

[updated Sun Feb 22 18:30:43 EST 2009]

Are you getting the feeling that our rights of freedom and speech are being violated on this website, if you do I will make a call to the proper authorities now. Are we in China now, the next Province after Taiwan you would almost think so, most of the comments are based on what has already been in the Canadian Press. Are the Chinese Spies at work in Canada subverting the Internet. Are you a member of the CRTC.

[updated Sun Feb 22 19:02:30 EST 2009]

"Canadian" And Polls.

I started thinking about something Canadian said to me. He does not believe in making electoral assumptions based on "one" poll. Why does that seem familiar? Oh yes, that's precisely what Canadian said when the Nanos polls started to show the gap tightening up between the Conservatives and the Liberals.

The last poll I saw was Harris/Decima released on February 9th. It put Conservative support at 33% followed by the Liberals at 31% with the NDP backed by 15%, the Greens and Bloc each with 10%.

Perhaps more significantly, it has the Conservatives and Liberal tied at 37% in battleground Ontario with the NDP garnering only 16%.

That confirms my thesis. We continue to rise while the Conservatives hold steady. Canadian may call it "another" one poll wonder. I call it a logical extension of a trend previously demonstrated by Nanos.

[updated Sun Feb 22 19:19:05 EST 2009]

For those thatt do not know the "One Canuck Opinion" can be seen at the Vancouver Sun and CBC.ca

[updated Sun Feb 22 19:34:50 EST 2009]

Boy are the callers ever feisty on Goldhawk Live tonight on CPAC!

[updated Sun Feb 22 20:46:41 EST 2009]

Either Harper is a liar or a giant hypocrit. Take your pick.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, September 9, 2004.

Excellency,

As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the
Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister
to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons
fail to support some part of the government’s program.

We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together
constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We
believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give
you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the
opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising
your constitutional authority.

Your attention to this matter is appreciated.

Sincerely,

Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P.
Leader of the Opposition
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada

Gilles Duceppe, M.P.
Leader of the Bloc Quebecois

Jack Layton, M.P.
Leader of the New Democratic Party

[updated Mon Feb 23 08:54:40 EST 2009]

Ronald interesting rethink on your rationale of "thinking outside the box", for using statitiscs of 1-3 recent Polls. I won't put too much criticism into those polls or worry/hope for many reasons already detailed in my previous posts.Turnout for the last 3 general election has been 60.9%, 64.7% and 58.8%.

I was curious about your thesis about relying on other factors besides hard polling data to understand your thoughts behind your views about the liberal prospects.

Some food for thought when clinging to a FEW GOOD polls for your thesis on the next electoral victory in the General Election.

Hard Data: The Ultimate Polls.

2004 Libs 135 seats 37.6%, NDP 19 seats 15.7%, Bloc 54 seats 12.4%, CPC 99 seats, 29.96%

http://punditsguide.ca/elections_e.php?elec_event=16
2006 Libs 103 seats 30.3%, NDP 29 seats, 17.5%, Bloc 51 seats 10.5%, CPC 124 seats 36.3%

2008 Libs 77 seats 26.7%, NDP 37 seats, 18.2% , Bloc 49 10%, CPC 143 37.7%

The Bloc are clearly not going to lose a significant number of seats to any federal party in Quebec even when their base stays home.

The NDP have grown their number of seats at the expense of the Liberal Party since 2004.
Their base has not grown dramatically but they have been effective in targeting seats that are winnable from the liberals.

The CPC have grown their number of seats at the expense of the Liberal Party since 2004. The base has NOT grown dramatically but they have been VERY effective in targeting winnable seats from the liberals.

[updated Mon Feb 23 08:59:28 EST 2009]

More BS from Harper, remember?

Fixed Election Dates

“A Conservative government will: Introduce legislation modeled on the BC and Ontario laws requiring fixed election dates every four years, except when a government loses the confidence of the House (in which case an election would be held immediately, and the subsequent election would follow four years later).” (”Stand Up For Canada”, Conservative Party of Canada Federal Election Platform 2006, p. 44)

Stand up for Canada and stop the lies.

[updated Mon Feb 23 09:00:36 EST 2009]

Why Harper lies:

What do close advisors to Stephen Harper and George W. Bush have in common? They reflect the disturbing teachings of Leo Strauss, the German-Jewish émigré who spawned the neoconservative movement.

Strauss believed that allowing citizens to govern themselves will lead, inevitably, to terror and tyranny. A ruling elite of political philosophers must make those decisions because it is the only group smart enough. It must resort to deception -- Strauss's "noble lie" -- to protect citizens from themselves. The elite must hide the truth from the public by writing in code. "Using metaphors and cryptic language," philosophers communicated one message for the elite, and another message for "the unsophisticated general population," philosopher Jeet Heer recently wrote in the Globe and Mail. "For Strauss, the art of concealment and secrecy was among the greatest legacies of antiquity."

The state should take a more activist role in policing social norms and values, Harper told the assembled conservatives. To achieve this goal, social and economic conservatives must reunite as they have in the U.S., where evangelical Christians and business rule in an unholy alliance. Red Tories must be jettisoned from the party, he said, and alliances forged with ethnic and immigrant communities who currently vote Liberal but espouse traditional family values. This was the successful strategy counselled by the neocons under Ronald Reagan to pull conservative Democrats into the Republican tent.

Movement towards the goal must be "incremental," he said, so the public won't be spooked.

Regime change, one step at a time.

Donald Gutstein, a senior lecturer in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University, writes a regular media column for The Tyee.

[updated Mon Feb 23 09:19:55 EST 2009]

Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Not a Uniter

I'm not sure how many progressive Libs are still holding out hope that Michael Ignatieff will ever reflect their views. But Ignatieff himself is making it clear that left-of-centre Canadians aren't going to be a priority for his party:

As for where he can draw voter support in the Conservative stronghold of Saskatchewan, Ignatieff said he's not a "unite the left guy," but he does want to pull votes from both sides.

"The Liberal party is a party of the centre. Part of my difficulty with a coalition is that I felt it would take my party off the centre," said Ignatieff.

Of course, it's far from clear why forming a coalition government would necessarily affect the Libs' internal ideological dynamics. Which would tend to signal that the latter comment is just another bad excuse for Ignatieff's choice to keep propping up the Cons.

But the more important message is that Ignatieff has now made it a matter of public record that he'd rather lead a Con-lite party than a united left out of fear of what the DFHs might do under his tent. And anybody looking to advance progressive causes in Canada who hasn't taken Ignatieff's earlier hints should see this as the strongest signal yet that it's time to move on from the Libs.

http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2009/02/not-uniter.html

[updated Mon Feb 23 09:24:16 EST 2009]

After reading many of the comments what is really lacking on this site, is tracking the performance of individual Civil Servants and Parliamentary Staff (that live in the 1800's) Pick your Civil Servant of the Day to rant on, we want your opinions to improve the Civil Service. Step one do not hire directly out of any University in Canada. Tell them to get a real job starting at Tim Horton's so they understand real life by talking to Canadians.

[updated Mon Feb 23 13:07:40 EST 2009]

Another conservative trashes Harper.

Andrew Coyne MacLeans magazine Feb 9 2009. "The End of Canadian Conservatism: How Harper Sold Out to Save Himself."

"The right is in full retreat."

Sellout liberal budget. New conservative leader is the only way to salvage what is left of the wrecked party.

[updated Mon Feb 23 15:40:53 EST 2009]

I cannot stand the Liberals on this website, they twist everything to put their point across, One guy doesn't understand the first callers to Goldhawk live were females and it was no script they supported Harper, Liberals get your facts straight, the greed for power is getting in the road for you to see the truth.

Regarding the CRTC, Canadian content does not mean French content, they are trying to disguise Canadian for French purposes only. The English want no intereference on the Intenet period. To Commissioners make sure you ask the French Canadians what content they are talking about the French content or the English they may be Canadian but totally different, that is why some Civil Servants have to be fired in Ottawa.

[updated Mon Feb 23 16:51:32 EST 2009]

Harper is unpopular as leader and is losing ground. Here in black and white. We conservatives need a new leader before its too late.

By Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun February 14, 2009
Houston, the Harper Conservatives have a problem. And it's one that could impede lift-off in the next federal election.

Ignatieff is well liked across regions, age groups, genders and political parties, "which will be key to him making gains in voter intention."
Harper's popularity, by contrast, "is deeply rooted in his conservative base but is quite weak outside of that base." -- the seeds of discontent could soon start being sown.

What that means is Ignatieff and his Liberals have lots of room to grow, while Harper and his Conservatives don't. And that growth is occurring. Grits have been steadily picking up support since Stephane Dion stepped down in December. During the same period, Conservatives and New Democrats have lost ground.

[updated Mon Feb 23 22:55:08 EST 2009]

Harper seems to be given up for deadin Quebec:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Harper+Quebec+problem/1319039/story.html

"There can be only one competitive federalist party at a time in Quebec, and the Liberals are now well-positioned to be that party. Liberal support in this CROP poll would translate into about 30 Quebec seats. And that would kick in the echo effect in Ontario, where voters like to elect national governments with support in Quebec."

[updated Tue Feb 24 00:17:10 EST 2009]

Taking A Lesson From Richard M. Nixon.

Many of us posters got extremely fired up during the coalition and prorogation crisis. That happened because each of us in our own way loves Canada. Things were said by most of us that we had every right to think but which nonetheless should perhaps have been left unsaid.

As we debate on this blog we should try to do better in the future and at least limit our personal attacks on one another and yes, even on the politicians.

Think about what Nixon said in his farewell address to his White House staff:

"Always remember, others may hate you. But those who hate you don't win unless you have them. And then you destroy yourself."

Too bad it took Nixon Watergate to learn that lesson himself and finally follow his own advice -- of course, by then it was too late...

[updated Tue Feb 24 05:44:08 EST 2009]

Identifying Tipping Points.

As we all know, politics is not a science but more of an art -- or to be more precise, a black art in recent times. Negative ads are the poison that put us to shame and infect our political discourse leaving it at best, deeply blemished or at worst, permanently sullied.

When am I pontificating all this to you? Because I want to make a serious point. Most of the time, some temporary political advantage can be gained by the introduction of negative ads into a campaign. But that effect is eventually negated by the tipping point: the moment an ad starts to do more harm than good because it has not only gone over the top, it has also gone beyond the bounds of common decency.

The last tipping point I saw was the U.S. Senate race in North Carolina between then incumbent Elizabeth Dole and her challenger, Kay Hagan. As Hagan's campaign started to pick up steam, Dole got desperate and put out an ad claiming that Hagen, a churchgoer, was "godless". In the end, a tight race became a seven point win for Hagen.

Now, let's take this idea and apply it in a Canadian context: going negative was not a resounding success for Stephen Harper in 2006. He had sponsorship, options-canada, an income trust investigation by the RCMP and a tired government in his arsenal but none of that was enough to win him a majority, but it worked -- it got him into power.

In its next application, again a focus on the negative: this time on the alleged lack of leadership skills of Stéphane Dion with a subliminal and extremely subtle focus on his personality and his province of origin. These last two factors were implicitly understood if not explicitly implied or stated directly. Again, mixed results for the negativity machine as the ads failed to deliver a majority government.

To my mind, the latter focus on negative ads marked the Canadian "tipping point" where for most Canadians, the hunger for negative ads was more than satiated. From this point on, for many voters, a focus on the negative will not only turn them off but serve as motivation to head for the polling booths.

That is the danger the Prime Minister is likely to face next time. Liberals can't win if they can't turn out their vote like last time. Secondly, they can't win if they can only turn out their vote. They have to shake loose "soft" supporters of other left to center left to center parties along with the "lapsed" voters.

No question that Harper will continue to make considerable inroads in the cultural communities. No doubt that will tip some seats into the Conservative column. In my view the Conservatives underestimate their loss potential in their projections.

U.S. President Barack Obama has shown us what the power of change and the will to implement it can do. Harper blew his chance to appear as the agent of change. He was too timid in remaking his cabinet. The PM went in the right direction by elevating some talented back benchers but too many duds were simply shuffled from left to right around the cabinet table.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff won't make that mistake. Ignatieff knows that while Obama is the epitome of change, he has to be at least, the instrument of change. That is point one. Point two: Ignatieff has to put the focus in the next campaign on generational change around the cabinet table -- his "faces" have to be a reflection of the faces of tomorrow.

Stephen Harper has failed to lead a government of generational change. The challenge for Michael Ignatieff -- and the opportunity -- is to pave the way for him as head of a government-in-waiting strongly committed to and focused on the vital change agenda for Canada.

[updated Tue Feb 24 06:46:10 EST 2009]

Consumer confidence on the rise: Harris-Decima poll
Last Updated: Monday, February 23, 2009 | 11:23 AM ET Comments78Recommend33
CBC News

A Harris-Decima poll suggests Canadian consumer confidence is on the rise, finding 27 per cent of those polled predict they'll be better off a year from now, against 13 per cent who expect to be worse off in early 2010.

Of those polled, 41 per cent believed now is a good time for a major purchase compared to 35 per cent in December.

Harris-Decima said confidence hasn't been this high since August.

"Some Canadians appear to be seeing light at the end of the economic tunnel," said Harris-Decima senior vice-president Jeff Walker.

The results seem a little counterintuitive on a day when Statistics Canada reported December retail sales sagged 5.4 per cent — the steepest monthly tumble in more than 15 years. Most of the decline, however, was in car sales. Excluding the automotive sector, retail sales were down 1.8 per cent.

"Restored consumer confidence is an important factor in any potential economic recovery," said Debbie Ammeter, a vice-president at mutual fund operator Investors Group.

"It is interesting to note that Canadians seem to recognize that things could be difficult for most of this year but yet there appears to be more who believe that they will be better off a year from now."

The Harris-Decima poll surveyed 2,000 people and claims a 95 per cent likelihood of accuracy within 2.2 percentage points.

[updated Tue Feb 24 06:46:52 EST 2009]

CPC are protecting the taxpayers by requiring GM/Labour provide a clear "on-going concern". Strict loans no pension bail-out. The Gift of Bob Rae keeps giving. Iggy will have to accept those facts. Dalton has a huge time bomb of $ 4.5 Billion compliments of the NDP side deal with GM/CAW pension shortfall.

How will the oppostion react? Will they demand the taxpayers keep the Gold plated Pension Plan negotiated between GM/CAW?

AUTOMOTIVE
Ottawa won't aid GM pension plan

SHAWN MCCARTHY and KAREN HOWLETT AND GREG KEENAN

February 24, 2009

OTTAWA AND TORONTO -- The federal government says Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty will have to go it alone if he wants to help General Motors of Canada Ltd. with the multibillion-dollar shortfall in its pension funds.

In its plan submitted last week, GM said unsustainable legacy costs - including its pension funds - are key stumbling blocks as it seeks to restructure to compete with Japanese rivals.

But federal Industry Minister Tony Clement is insisting that GM's pension problems are part of an ongoing provincial responsibility, and that federal help will be specifically targeted to the company's restructuring effort.

"We're interested in restructuring the company; we're not particularly interested in providing support to pay out pensions," said a senior federal official. The pension side of the equation is more Ontario-based. They have more at stake on it."

Under provincial legislation, the Ontario government has responsibility for ensuring the viability of GM's pension plan in Canada. Mr. McGuinty said yesterday the province is considering helping the company restructure the pension funds.

"I think it's something that we have to say we're prepared to consider," he told reporters. "How much of a give there would be on our part, I don't know at this point in time."

Mr. McGuinty did not acknowledge if he is worried about the political backlash from spending taxpayers' money to safeguard gold-plated auto worker pensions, especially at a time when retirement plans for many other employees have been hurt by the economic crisis. But Mr. Clement was quick last Friday to reject any federal help for the company's pension plan.

"We're not bailing out pension plans: Let me be crystal clear on that," Mr. Clement told a news conference. Both the federal and Ontario governments have insisted any financial aid would consist of repayable loans. But Mr. McGuinty acknowledged yesterday he does not know if this would also apply to any assistance for GM's pension funds.

The federal official said any loans made to GM would carry strict conditions. He acknowledged, however, GM must deal with its pension plan as part of its restructuring. GM warned last week that it needs agreements with the governments and the Canadian Auto Workers on reducing hourly labour costs by the end of March.

"We're optimistic of our ability to achieve that, but in the event we cannot achieve competitiveness, we need to re-evaluate our future strategy in Canada," said GM president Fritz Henderson.

The plan GM submitted to Ottawa and Ontario last week contained several references to crippling pension and health care liabilities that will grow this spring when it closes a pickup truck plant in Oshawa, Ont., and again in 2010 when a transmission factory in Windsor, Ont., is shuttered.

The solvency deficiency - or shortfall in the funds if the company were to fail - was $4.5-billion in November, 2007.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090224.RAUTOS24//TPStory/National

[updated Tue Feb 24 07:59:18 EST 2009]

Again Don Martin alleging the PS will being playing political games and revenge on the Conservatives. This Liberal Biased hack has written this theory 3x.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/columnists/Stimulus+bucks+stall+bureaucracy/1323227/story.html

Stimulus bucks may stall in bureaucracy


By Don Martin, Calgary HeraldFebruary 24, 2009 3:01 AM
"Finance Minister Jim Flaherty showed up to plead for the budget's acceleration--and most MPs obliged by setting a pace that Rajotte hopes will have the budget back into the House of Commons next week, where it will be voted off to the Senate to complete the approval process.

But discouraging words are being heard inside the bureaucracy suggesting a cumbersome approval process put in place by Conservatives trying to thwart another loose-rules sponsorship scandal will choke off spending for many weeks at best, or more likely for a bunch of months.

As my Canwest News colleague Kathryn May noted in a weekend story, just getting the cabinet paperwork in order can footdrag approval for 10 weeks and then it can take another two months to limp before the Treasury Board, not to mention the lineup for a hands-on blessing by the Prime Minister's Office.

Insiders and big city mayors are confident Infrastructure Minister John Baird will find a way accelerate the stimulus package politically, but the bucks can stop inside the labyrinth of public servant offices.

One senior lobbyist with lofty departmental connections predicts the bureaucracy will exact revenge for Conservative salary and hospitality clampdowns by ensuring no major stimulus flows until the government is seriously wounded by the slow trickle of dollars.

That seems excessively machiavellian, but this is a pretty petty town so anything's possible."

[updated Tue Feb 24 08:08:36 EST 2009]

Where are Harpers seats going to come from?

"Harper's popularity, by contrast, is deeply rooted in his conservative base but is quite weak outside of that base.

What that means is Ignatieff and his Liberals have lots of room to grow, while Harper and his Conservatives don't. And that growth is occurring." Harris Decima

He has nothing in left in Quebc and almost nothing in the Maritimes. He had roughly half the seats in Ontario against Dion (we know that's not going to recur).

Even if he wins every seat in the west, which he won't, he must now sustain the gains he made in Ontario aginst Dion just to eek out a slim minority due to losses in Quebec. The seats just aren't there. The majority is gone and the minority is quickly evaporating. He's going to lose and drag us down with him. The only honourable thing to do would be to resign. But we all know the only honourable thing about Harper is his title.

[updated Tue Feb 24 08:12:10 EST 2009]

Ronald, Westerner,

We may have different political party affiliations but the last week we have seen our PM talk about this wonderful country and the big reasons why we are united with our best friends.

I was quite happy in watching and listening to OBAMA agree with Harper on a similar environmental/trade agenda.

I would prefer both of them doing more and improving pollution and recycling efforts.

Where do you see these two countries in six months with more bad news in regards to delays from the opposition in each leader's countries?

How do you think it will play out in the public if the opposition parties delay the stimulus bills?

Risk vs Reward strategy?

Thanks for trying to add discourse and leave personal/character attacks to a minimum.

[updated Tue Feb 24 09:43:56 EST 2009]

The Sponsorship Scandal, the gift that keeps giving. What will be fallout and why are the Bloc and opposition parties going to block the attempt of the government to reclaim the $ 35 million in over charges by the liberal friendly ad agency?

Any thoughts? What is the best strategy for Iggy the liberals on this latest story?
Bloc asks Ottawa to protect Globe reporter
GLORIA GALLOWAYFrom Tuesday's Globe and Mail February 23, 2009 at 10:44 PM EST
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090223.wpolygone24/BNStory/politics/?cid=al_gam_nletter_newsUp

[updated Tue Feb 24 11:38:12 EST 2009]

Ronald, Westerner regarding feeback on the Harper mission pushing the Canada agenda, how would you rate it so far on the international stage?

Here is a quote from Fox Newscast. I think is it great Canada is getting some "Positive Exposure". What do you think?

"Everything from his meeting with President Obama last week, to NAFTA to the “Buy American” clause in the stimulus to carbon emissions and the Canadian Sands to the banking system. Why has Canada’s banking system withstood the financial crisis while other countries banking systems like the U.S. are in such dire straits? In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada’s banking system the healthiest in the world. The U.S. was ranked 40th. Canada’s system has much stronger federal regulations and lower mandatory leverage ratios. Canada’s firms never engaged in subprime mortgage lending. For over a decade, Canada has posted budget surpluses; only in the last quarter did they enter into a recession. What is working? What lessons could we learn from them? Take a look. Prime Minister Harper is very impressive."

[updated Tue Feb 24 12:18:04 EST 2009]

I suggest you all go to cbc.ca british columbia and comment on the Braidwood inquiry especially the testimony of this RCMP officer.

Fact 1: He seem to have little knowledge of the 9 principals of Policing

Fact 2 He received no updated training on the new rules of Policing from the RCMP at any Detachment, not even a Staff news letter

Fact 3 A Stapler was a threat, common on now you really expect us to believe this.

Opinion: A retired RCMP officer of some rank and a Instructor says this Police Force has become a collection of whimps and it all started when they hired women and visibable minors at a ht of 5'0"

My suggestion is fire all the trainers and recruitors at head office in Ottawa, Training updates every month no tasers use until you have worked with Senior Officer partner for 5 years. And we are paying 900 million for Security at the 2010 games.

[updated Tue Feb 24 19:04:00 EST 2009]

To day in one of major newspapers re protect the journalist, regarding the Sponsorship Program, on suggestions to recover the 35 million owed to the government. My suggestion was that the Liberal Party and its members be held accountable for paying back the $35 million to the government, you created the problem and you will not get elected any time soon, are you listening Power Corporation and CanWest ( oh your now broke I see, was this by design) Is it time for the CRA audit on all Liberals members to get things going or what. Tell me your thoughts and suggestions Nik on the Number bloggers, where is Parnel when you need him!

[updated Tue Feb 24 20:22:47 EST 2009]

What The Opposition Needs To Know About Stephen Harper.

As some commentators on this blog have suggested, while most of us are playing strategic checkers games, Stephen Harper is playing something else -- many believe the Prime Minister is playing chess. I will go one step further: the PM is playing advanced chess ( a game in which a grandmaster, or any player is combined with a computer versus another team of the same calibre).

That is precisely what Harper is doing. He is using his own theories and instincts and combining them with electoral metrics provided by computer data bases. Not too shabby, in my book.

Now let's apply this concept to the Prime Minister's political strategy: Harper is a strategic manipulator par excellence. He wants the Andrew Coynes, Gerry Nicholls and Tasha Kheiriddens of this world (I think Tom Flanagan is in on it with Harper) to jump up and down and rant in protest. The more the merrier. These conservative pawns are playing right into his hands, willingly or more than likely, unwittingly.

This is the first PM who via his finance minister, brought down a budget that not only does he not have any confidence in but to which he is himself opposed on an ideological basis. Talk about one for the history books.

Harper is gambling that with plenty of opposition on the right, it will reinforce his so-called moderate image (another well conceived and executed act of theatre on his part) and thus lead voters to conclude that he can't be that bad -- within the limits of the reasonable political mainstream.

Now comes the kicker -- the dénouement calls for the Prime Minister to eventually take his case to the electorate and hopefully, win a majority mandate.

That's when the true Stephen Harper will shine. Out will come the real conservative along with a devastatingly representative budget.

What a game plan. It remains to be seen whether Canadians will be gullible enough to fall for it.

[updated Wed Feb 25 10:54:18 EST 2009]

A few weeks ago, I stated and listed why Iggy would be the 2nd leader who would not become the PM as a liberal.

I won't repeat the list here, but some of the proof regarding his honeymoon ending are now coming home to roost.

A Senior Liberal with the Ontario Government has published a scathing article regarding Iggy. Several papers have published it and now it will start rolling along the bloggers and tv media shortly.

The infamous Warren Kinsella who was brought back by Iggy is continuing to damage the party by his antics. He is being brought up in his attacks against TVO Steve Paiken in the HOC by the NDP,CPC, Bloc.

The NDP/Bloc are increasing their attacks on the Liberals and are painting them with responsiblity for passing the budget.

Harper will wear this, but so will Iggy (who clearly stated his job was to oppose and not propose)

The Liberals are trying to redefine themselves as a centrist party and are stuck as Dion was in propping up the CPC against the opposition.

[updated Wed Feb 25 12:44:50 EST 2009]

For are interesting look at what is going on www.captainsherlock.com it has canadian connections, look for movie

[updated Wed Feb 25 14:51:15 EST 2009]

That Damned Loyalty Thing!

If you wonder why people go to Ottawa, there are a number of reasons: some go to make a difference and serve their country; others make it because they are political opportunists who have done a lot of bowing and scraping and have earned their just reward.

And then there is that other group -- those who believe in a party and often a leader -- those who are prepared to go to hell and back for a government. I get the feeling this group is the smallest minority. Someone committed to the leadership of a prime minister has to be like a willow tree: capable of swaying and bending during bad times without breaking.

So far I have never seen a government that has convinced me that I belong in the third category. Will Canadians provide me with an opportunity to reassess my view of the world in the not too distant future? I hope so.

I want to have a cause close to my heart again. I want to be proud of my party rather than constantly at odds with many of its positions or the direction in which the government intends to take our nation. I want to feel at home in Canada again. Should I give up on that dream or is there perhaps a light at the end of the tunnel? Voters -- I'm just asking.

[updated Wed Feb 25 16:16:09 EST 2009]

The trouble with this site I cannot remember where I make a comment and want to read a response good or bad does not bother me. Why are their so many suspended people on this site. I thought we were a country of Free Speech and Free of Press or has this change since Chretien visited theThugs in Beijing. I hope the Superior Prime Minister Harper never goes there, Officially! Long Live the New Reform Party in BC, it will make Elizabeth May at the Green Party look like she lived in the 1800's to day!

[updated Wed Feb 25 19:06:24 EST 2009]

Who's Up For My Thinking Out Of The Box Challenge?

Why is there an analogy between the 40 Billion dollar loss by La Caisse de dépôt et de placement du Québec and the Conservative Party's political strategy of incremental gains? What does the former prove about the flaws found in the latter?

[updated Wed Feb 25 21:00:51 EST 2009]

It looks as though the Libs are going to start showcasing Justin Trudeau a she will present a private members bill on volunteerism.

another smart Iggy move as the name still resonates well

[updated Wed Feb 25 22:19:55 EST 2009]

It appears that Iggy is going to confront the ghosts of Adscam head on thus daring the cons to bring it up................I like his style.

http://blog.macleans.ca/2009/02/25/look-who%E2%80%99s-back-in-the-party/

[updated Thu Feb 26 06:05:51 EST 2009]

Not Another Numbskull...

I've always enjoyed reading and listening to political operatives and pundits who are at the top of their game. That's why I don't understand yesterday's episode in the House of Commons.

What was she trying to do? Does this mean that her colleague, the National Embarassment was out of town? Was she hoping to compete with him? Trust me, he's in a class all by himself. No one can possibly match him...

[updated Thu Feb 26 08:53:13 EST 2009]

New Crop poll shows Liberals making big gains in Quebec it says this type of success often gets "mirrored" in Ontario. The fact that today the Conservatives and the NDP are repeatedly speaking of the old Sponsorhip Scandal leads one to believe they think this is true.

[updated Thu Feb 26 15:47:43 EST 2009]

On winning the next election, the makings of a perfect storm.

Westerner, Ronald, MRM, what do you think about the recent headlines and how they are going to shape the upcoming campaign?

1) Crime and Saftey
2) Economic Hardship
3) Environment (Natural Resource)
4) Greater cooperation with the US

What party stands to gain the most and why from these "hot buttons" in the next campaign.

Am I missing any central themes?

[updated Thu Feb 26 18:42:27 EST 2009]

Can anyone tell me, if the Liberals won the Election?

[updated Thu Feb 26 20:45:46 EST 2009]

it looks as though Harper is really trying to have an open government....NOT

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090226.wPOLinformation0226/BNStory/politics/home
Government secrecy ‘grim,' watchdog says

OTTAWA — The federal Information Commissioner is warning that Canadians' ability to get information from their government has reached a dire state.

The Harper Conservatives now routinely delay requests for government documents – a right of Canadians under the law – well beyond the 30 days that the Access to Information Act requires.

[updated Thu Feb 26 21:29:50 EST 2009]

Flaherty admits to his own Adscam before it even happens:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090225.wflahert0225/BNStory/politics/home

[updated Thu Feb 26 21:31:22 EST 2009]

In a 1997 interview, Stephen Harper made it clear that he had supported the NCC as an MP and at every stage in his political career.

The NCC was founded explicitly to oppose publicly funded, universal Medicare. In 1997, As NCC Vice-President, Harper said that Canada should scrap the Canada Health Act.

When Harper is asked if he will privatize healthcare, he always repeats a stock answer: " I will do nothing against the Canada Health Act." This is because he is going to scrap it before he privatizes it. For once he is actually telling the truth.

[updated Thu Feb 26 22:08:15 EST 2009]

As much as he would like to be Iggy is no Obama. In fact he more Bush that Barrack!

The anti-Ignatieff attack is more than it appears
Posted: February 25, 2009, 1:00 PM by Kelly McParland National Post
Full Comment, Stephen Taylor, Canadian politics

There was a bit of a buzz yesterday about an article published in the left-wing pages of the Guardian, a British newspaper, by Michael Stickings. However, most commentators missed a few important points about its significance. First though, here are some quotes from the piece,

“Why did Ignatieff do what he did? Because he has no interest right now in bringing down the government and thereby being compelled to share power. Because his political career has been about his own glorification, about his desire – for it seems to be the only reason he entered politics in the first place – to be prime minister. He may generously be called a chameleon, a shifty academic difficult to pin down, but perhaps more accurately he ought to be called an egotist who is sure of his own superiority and who seems to lack any real passion for the country he intends to lead.”

As the Toronto Star’s Haroon Siddiqui put it back in December, Ignatieff has been even more of a George Bush cheerleader than Harper:

As is well-known, Ignatieff supported the war in Iraq, a position he only semi-retreated from last year, in year four of the botched occupation. Even then, he argued that he had been wrong for the right reasons (saving the Kurds from Saddam Hussein), while opponents of the war may have been right for the wrong reasons (ideological opposition to Bush). He also supported the use of such harsh interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects as sleep deprivation and hooding, even while saying he opposed torture. He was also an advocate for American exceptionalism in defiance of international law.

“To me, though, he has never seemed to be much of a Canadian, and certainly not enough of one to be our prime minister. It’s not that he has spent so much of his life overseas – mostly in Britain and the US. It’s that he has seemed to aspire actively to be anything but Canadian, and more specifically to be American. Which is fine, in a cosmopolitan sort of way, but he comes back to Canada with an air of condescension about him, as if he has seen the world and conquered it and has now decided, with the coaxing of a party eager for him to lead it back to the promised land, to sully himself in the world of politics supposedly on our behalf but really because he just wants to be prime minister, so great would it look on his resumé, a capstone to a long and successful career.”

So who is Michael Stickings? Some have pointed out that he’s a Liberal-minded fellow who writes a blog. But let’s dig a bit deeper. Michael Stickings isn’t just some grassroots Liberal-minded blogger, he’s a senior policy adviser in Dalton McGuinty’s public service! Stickings is listed as a senior member of the Ontario government’s “Strategy and Results Branch” of which reports to the Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Stickings, now a senior public service staffer in McGuinty’s government, supported Bob Rae for the latest round of the Liberal leadership,

“I supported former Ontario Premier Bob Rae for the leadership, but Rae pulled out of the race late last year”

What we’re seeing here is an explicit shot across the bow and not one by just some Liberal-minded blogger against the federal Liberal leader, this is much more. A senior policy adviser to Dalton McGuinty’s Ontario public service and admitted Bob Rae booster wrote this about the Liberal who will run to be Prime Minister in the next election, To me, though, he has never seemed to be much of a Canadian, and certainly not enough of one to be our prime minister. It’s not that he has spent so much of his life overseas – mostly in Britain and the US. It’s that he has seemed to aspire actively to be anything but Canadian, and more specifically to be American. This isn’t just some wannabe Liberal hack. This shows that there are some serious questions about Ignatieff among well-placed Liberal supporters.

[updated Thu Feb 26 23:14:33 EST 2009]

Harper's dirty tricks won't work this time. If he goes negative there will be a backlash. Allan Greg says that his polling shows this very strongly across Canada. Even though it worked before, he says it won't work now. (Greg cannot be dismissed as inacccurate or a liberal by any measure, he's a Tory and everyone knows it)

Harper is done, because that's his one trick pony show. Nasty nasty, nothing else.

Ignatieff is playing nice, because he sees the polls too. (Andrew Coyne, a conservative, says Ignatieff is doing very well) That is why he continues to rise in the polls, and the conservatives are goiong nuts, because they can't do anything about their dropping poll numbers.

Harper almost lost it yesterday with his taunts. Keep it up Steve, your helping the liberals.

[updated Fri Feb 27 09:12:12 EST 2009]

Minority Prime Ministers.

We have had minority prime ministers in Canada who have accomplished a greal deal. The first that comes to mind is Lester B. Pearson, winner of the Nobel Peace prize.

But I want to focus on a much more narrow interpretation of a minority prime minister: in the strictest political sense, in the ability to control parliament and move one's political agenda ahead with the greatest prospect for legislative success, to be a minority PM is a tacit admission of leadership failure.

A true political winner goes out there and moves mountains. That prime minister brings the country willingly and enthusiastically along for the ride. That PM has a vision for Canada and takes us there -- no questions asked.

I'm still waiting. But at least, now I have hope for a better tomorrow.

[updated Fri Feb 27 09:59:06 EST 2009]

"Harper and MacKay are a farce" Says Russia. US says it was not a threat. Yay, Harper, embarrass us again internationally with your infantile games. The world is laughing at his fake performance.

[updated Fri Feb 27 21:09:00 EST 2009]

Momentum can be misunderstood, do you think Jane Taber and her liberal friends are confusing the "rock star" OBAMA with the recent improvements of a post Dion leader?

I am on the record for Iggy in being in support of the majority of the CPC policies, his difficulty with keeping his party two camps disciplined/united for a considerable length of time. I did not imagine the first vote would be failure in his leadership whip's ability to keep his caucus united.

So much for the Iggy ommission about Canadians needing another election like "hole in the head" - If the Liberals are (can be painted) seen as repsonsible for causing this next one, will they pay at the polls or be rewarded in blaming Harper for not spending fast enough or it working?

I get a overwhelming sense Canadians want money spent to help those Canadians affected, the polls are looking for the parties to deal with the crisis in a cooperative manner.

Now we have the opposition clearly divided wtih the Liberals stuck supporting the CPC budget and agreeing to "fast track" some measures how will this play in the next general election or the left leaning liberals who are tired or defending the Harper gov't?

Ronald, MRM, Western, Posters created more than a WEEK ago,

If we are to believe the current campaign has been on since the November Economic Update how would your rate the efforts by the parties so far?

Can you explain what common pitfalls are not being avoided and what are the 1-2 best opportunites for your party to criticize their opponents?

Some liberal biased (Jane Taber) reporters are now alleging that Iggy may want to pull the plug after the convention using momentum (citing the economy as the public reason). Iggy has promised large labour he would not support another budget vote.

The CPC appear to be losing patience with the delaying tactics of the opposition parties in regards to the budget. They are now threatening a confidence matter on a $ 3 Billion Infrastructure amount to demostrate their point in the HOC.

Given that all the other 3 party leaders have tremendous 'campaign' experience what are the chances Iggy's ability to no answer questions in an intelligble manner for the non harvard graduate perpspective or will we require a translator to explain his comments? How will play during those comments "sound bites" resonate in the news?

[updated Sat Feb 28 08:53:23 EST 2009]

It will be interesting to see follow up national polls after the recent crop poll in Quebec showing Iggy pulling away from the field.

The Liberals are working towards a majority and Iggy has put a real sense of urgency into the party's machinery. He is now officially acclaimed leader as the deadline was midnight last night for any other candidates to file their applications and none did.

[updated Sat Feb 28 10:08:25 EST 2009]

Watching Peter Lougheed on Mansbridge One On One on Newsworld. It is really worth a watch. Lougheed has still got it. Catch it on internet, if you can.

[updated Sat Feb 28 14:42:45 EST 2009]

Hey Guys, How About A Heads Up!

First the bouquet -- then the brick: I for one have been mightily impressed at the command that Peter MacKay has of his portfolio, until now. The man knows his department and his briefs. But seriously, how could he ask the Russians repeatedly to give us "advance notice" prior to Bear bomber incursions into international airspace that this country "monitors"? Come on, get real. Talk about counter-intuitive.

This cat and mouse game has been going on for decades. Quite obviously, the object of the exercise is to test the adversary's defenses. You want to see how long it takes NORAD to scramble and whether their response times are improving.

I can't believe MacKay made public his repeated requests. I hope no one in the Kremlin died laughing.

[updated Sat Feb 28 16:30:55 EST 2009]

Wow, it must be really bad for the conservatives. No one here can counter the negative facts and Harper is embarassing himself internationally. He must be throwing a lot of office furniture these days.

[updated Sat Feb 28 22:22:03 EST 2009]

I Apologize.

I want to post an apology here to say that I deeply regret my recent statements about notice requests which Defence Minister Peter MacKay made to Russian officials in connection with Russian bomber overflights through international airspace which Canada monitors.

Quite obviously I was totally incorrect on that specific point. Again, I want to apologize to Mr. MacKay without reservations. I will try to be more accurate in the future.

[updated Sun Mar 01 11:51:25 EST 2009]

Yes, part of it Ronald it starts off, really attacking the Federal Reserve in the USA for creating money out of thin air and giving it to the banks. For those that do not this the Modern Money Mechanics written by the USA, Zeitgeist:Addenum

www.zeitgeistmovie.com about two hours long! Very interesting if want to understand about money and that Politicians can never solve our problems,

[updated Sun Mar 01 14:50:01 EST 2009]

Looks as though Iggy is making points in Harper's back yard:

Credit where it's due
Calgary HeraldMarch 1, 2009Comments (2)
Michael Ignatieff has miles to go for support in Alberta to go his way but, by defending the oilsands, the federal Liberal leader has taken his first steps.

Ignatieff has positioned himself as a staunch supporter of the industry so many Canadians love to hate.

"This is a huge industry. It employs Canadians from coast to coast," he said in reference to a National Geographic article about Alberta's oilsands.

The 20-page spread is the most recent in a series of bad publicity that paints the industry as an environmental catastrophe.

It's refreshing to hear a federal opposition leader use his position responsibly.

Instead of scoring easy political points, Ignatieff has risen above cheap criticism and consistently reminded the rest of Canada how it benefits from Alberta's resource revenues.

Royalties and taxes pump millions of dollars into local economies, they build schools and hospitals, and they feed families, keeping houses running smoothly in Newfound-land and elsewhere.

Ignatieff is delivering the right message across Canada, even in Montreal, where he spoke with business students in January.

It is unwise to bite the hand that feeds, or in this case, the industry that feeds hundreds of thousands of people across Canada.

This is a refreshing change from previous Liberal -- including provincial Liberal -- policy that suggested the feds should heavily tax the oilsands and focus on alternative sources of fuel.

Finally, a Liberal leader who gets it.

[updated Sun Mar 01 20:25:47 EST 2009]

CBSA And Truckers.

Here we go again: the Canadian Press is reporting that nuclear, military and other sensitive materials are being exported to the U.S. without mandatory inspections by Canada Border Services Agency.

Don't you just love those truckers...whether they are returning to Canada with imports or leaving for the U.S., they deliberately go out of their way to cross the border during non-office hours. Sometimes this affects Customs, but most of the time customs brokers (those that do not have border offices) - a broker handles imports or exports for private companies either based in Canada, the U.S. or elsewhere. They are the intermediary between CBSA or CBP (U.S. Customs and Border Protection) and the importer or exporter. Sometimes brokers deal with both governments on the same shipment.

Personally, I'm glad to see CBSA moving in the direction of mandatory electronic (computer generated) E-15A forms for goods destined for export to any country, including the United States. I would suggest a 72 hour window to permit inspections by CBSA prior to arrival at U.S. Customs ports. (A border point is a Customs port in the internal jargon.)

On the import side, all shipments must be cleared by computer and are transmitted to Customs prior to arrival at the border. Inland clearances are also possible in warehouses. Again, both are electronic except for a few narrow exceptions. Other government departments are also moving to an electronic platform with CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) planning to be all electronic soon.

Here are some measures that could increase security:

-force all small parcel cargo companies to go electronic as far as imports are concerned: brokers download their customers' shipments and then clear them with Customs on computer. (UPS is on line since 2 years; DHL since a few months; FedEx starts at the end of March; FedEx Ground is working on it etc.)

- institute a mandatory electronic customs manifest for all carriers in Canada. Many truckers already have that but it is not yet entirely mandatory for all types of freight imports into Canada.

- institute a mandatory Customs bond for all importers (like in the U.S.) thereby ensuring that the Government of Canada gets its duties and taxes even under situations where the importer has made a proposal to avoid bankruptcy or has gone bankrupt. Right now, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act shafts all brokers who paid GST or less increasingly, Duty and other taxes on behalf of clients who then get into financial trouble. (Brokers are the only businesses in Canada who remit GST but lose it if they have not been paid by the importer.) They can put some clients on Direct GST payment but they can't do that for all their clients for obvious business reasons. (That is why UPS is before the Supreme Court of Canada on a related matter.) But I digress.

- And again to sound like a broken record, get those students out of primary inspection stations at the border. Give them clerical work to do inside Customs offices, allow them to answer phones, whatever, but keep them clear from the first line of border defense. (I'm sure the Customs union will love it but who cares.)

[updated Sun Mar 01 20:29:48 EST 2009]

A Frustrated Prime Minister.

So nice to see John Baird on Question Period. I missed him. Hell, I would like to see him out front for this government as much as possible.

Baird says the PM is frustrated over opposition party obstruction of the Budget Implementation Act. He also says that the Prime Minister was not serious about going to an election.

For once I believe Baird: the CPC blew two golden opportunities to sink the opposition in an election - the first in May 2007 and of course, last December. The PM has revealed himself to be gun shy three times. Everyone knows he's bluffing, with that track record.

Am I willing to risk it? Damned right I am.

[updated Sun Mar 01 20:46:07 EST 2009]

Here's a damning article on Harper's secrecy..some public figure he is:
From the TO Star:

"Three years ago, Stephen Harper sold himself to Canadians as a champion of federal transparency as he campaigned for the prime minister's job. He promised to "lift up the veils of secrecy" in Ottawa and to foster a "culture of accountability." After all, people have a right to know what their government is up to. But that was then.

In a scathing report this week, federal Information Commissioner Robert Marleau reminded Canadians of how far short Harper has fallen from honouring his veil-lifting pledge. Marleau slammed the Conservatives' "stranglehold" on federal communications. He condemned Ottawa's "risk-averse, disclosure-averse" atmosphere. And he hammered the Tories for a "tendency to withhold information."

Canada faces "a major information-management crisis," he warned. Access to information staff are overworked, resources are thin and processes are inefficient.

And the problem begins at the top, Marleau noted."

[updated Sun Mar 01 20:52:03 EST 2009]

The next Prime Minister must come from British Columbia born and bread that is the bottomline period. End of Story.

[updated Sun Mar 01 21:31:15 EST 2009]

I'm In Heaven!

Can't believe the Conservatives are that dense...incroyable mais vrai, as one might say in French. The war room boys and girls have been given the go-ahead to prepare attack ads against Michael Ignatieff.

Talk about stupid. They couldn't read a changing political environment if it slapped them in the face. So much for the prime ministerial facade of cooperation in Parliament. Harper has signed off on this one without realizing that the public will not stand for it -- this time.

People will rapidly recognize it for what it is -- more of the same excuses from a government that cannot come up with a single reason for re-electing it -- all they can do is do what they have always done best - try and kill the opposition messenger.

They don't want voters to be FOR Stephen Harper and the CPC. They want us to be AGAINST Michael Ignatieff and the LPC.

Watch the public anger build in the coming days and weeks. Also watch for a Conservative back down when the heat starts to get too strong for them. Back down or no, they are digging their political grave. Too bad none of them are sophisticated enough to realize it.

[updated Sun Mar 01 21:42:12 EST 2009]

Why is it the Liberals cannot accept the fact they are no longer in Power, You do not have the god given right to have this Power Liberals. You simply cannot manage government you just do what these incompetant Civil Servants tell you what to do and same for the Banks.

[updated Sun Mar 01 22:29:47 EST 2009]

Harper has accused those who wanted to pull out of Afganistan, because it was unwinable, as "Having a passion for the taliban and not supporting our troops." He now says Afganistan is unwinable and we should pull out by 2011.

Does this mean he was wrong to make that statement or does he now consider himself to have "a passion for the Taliban and not support the troops? Curious to know which one it is.

[updated Sun Mar 01 22:30:18 EST 2009]

We have now found who the real trouble maker on this website is, it is Larry the Liberal and why some many people have been suspended, Larry the Liberal keeps complaining to Nik, just what Liberals are good at whinning all the time, Time have this Party abolished for the good of all of Canada the 416 Regional Party at best!

[updated Sun Mar 01 23:37:34 EST 2009]

Confirmation: Not Voting Liberal In Next Election When Ever That Is!

[updated Mon Mar 02 01:34:39 EST 2009]

I just listened to Jim Prentice again this morning on CBC news. What a refreshing change from the nasty negatives Harper, Baird, Polievre etc.

He has class and is very mature in his presentation and is very knowledgable. No BS, and no forked tongue. A very welcome relief. While I did not agree with all of his points (I don't agree with any politician 100%), not once did he make a negative remark, nor did he misstate his case for political gain. Wow, so different from the rabble.

He's the type of politician that could convince me to vote for him as PM no matter what party or riding he is from. Dream on? Maybe. Perhaps one day.

[updated Mon Mar 02 09:08:59 EST 2009]

Very interesting article today (March 2) in the Globe and Mail titled "Ignatieff comes a-courtin' " Must reading for all Liberals!

[updated Mon Mar 02 10:12:17 EST 2009]

Filling The Conservative "Vacuum".

I'm confused. Isn't Stephen Harper the "Canadian" Barack Obama? At least that's how Conservatives tell the story. Up until now they have been so self-satisfied with themselves proclaiming that they are Barrack North while Ignatieff is "Obama-lite", in their words.

Too bad the Wall Street Journal won't get with the program. This revealing quote says it all:

"...There is a vacuum in Conservative leadership in North America and on the world stage, and Mr. Harper is stepping into it." He sure is. Funny how one party can be all things to all people -- Conservative when addressing CPC party members but allegedly moderate and mainstream when trying to sell itself to the Canadian people.

That's what I like about Senator Irving Gerstein -- the guy always tells it like it is, not like Harper hopes we will think it is.

[updated Mon Mar 02 18:47:04 EST 2009]

Slowly Slipping Away.

Can't you feel it? Government MPs wound up tighter than a drum - shuffling off to their appointments with a pained look of agitation on their faces. Some are short tempered, others fighting bouts of insomnia.

A sense of dread is in the air - three years and counting with the thread seemingly slipping through their fingers. Back pedaling and question evasion are now the order of the day. Frantic attempts at regrouping to at least hold the line.

Too little, too late. The dawn of a new day will soon be upon us. Pray and hope. That is about all they have left.

[updated Mon Mar 02 22:59:57 EST 2009]

Here's another piece that details the big lie Harper is trying to sell the Americans on oil sands GHG issues. Carbon capture is a zero sum game that will cost us billions in wasted efforts and even his usually sober minister Prentice appears to be caught in that downdraft. The fact Harper despises the environmental portfolio because it doesn't fit his populist and decentralization model is even more telling here.

http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/594953

Canada, however, is playing that card. It's gambling that technology will make sure the house wins.

But here's the rub: Prime Minister Stephen Harper is delusional if he believes that capturing carbon dioxide from coal plants and oil-sands operations and storing it underground is going to have a material impact on reducing greenhouse-gases over the next decade, let alone the next two decades.

Not because the technology doesn't work or isn't safe, which is still up for debate, but because it's too expensive and risky to deploy on the scale that's required.

The thing is, Harper isn't really delusional. He's just greenwashing, which according to Wikipedia occurs when "significantly more money or time has been spent advertising being green."

Harper will know, if the economist in him has done his homework, that there are no real incentives for oil and gas companies to pay for the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems. Sure, putting a price on carbon might nudge them to dabble, but large-scale deployment won't happen if the price on carbon isn't high enough.

And there's a strong chance it won't be, at least not before 2020. New York-based New Energy Finance, a consultancy that specializes in carbon pricing, says reduced economic activity over the past year has already led to a significant decrease in U.S. emissions as fossil fuel and electricity use falls.

[updated Tue Mar 03 05:58:33 EST 2009]

Her's another piece to show why Harper is the wrong guy at the wrong time and the wrong place. Canada like the US has become decidedly more Liberal and left leaning. With Harper being totally offside his political style can do nothing good for Canada. I belive we are in a period of seminal change and conservatism as we know it won't survive the onslaught. the Reform party platform that Harper tries to deliver is now a very minor player in the big picture of western democracies and in particular the NA continent.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090302.wcomartin03/BNStory/specialComment

"Writing in the Post, one of the editors lamented on the weekend that "Conservatism, as we know it, is dead." Many starboard voices south of the border offer similar sentiments. In their dire thoughts, they forget about the cycles, how the teeter-totter of time is likely to relieve them of their perceived perdition.

Down cycles aren't necessarily doom cycles, but what is worrisome for Conservatives is the assault on their catechism that this great recession has occasioned. Tory declines under Kim Campbell, John Diefenbaker and others were driven by leadership woes and party disunity. Under Stephen Harper, it is not that, but rather the apparent undermining of party precepts. The last time, in the 1930s, that conservative economics were so repudiated, there followed nearly 22 consecutive years of Liberal rule in Canada and 20 uninterrupted years of Democratic power in Washington."

[updated Tue Mar 03 06:19:11 EST 2009]

More damage control for Iggy and the Liberals. How will Iggy explain this to his NFLD liberal wing? A Liberal Senator is sticking it to Canadians who work and earn an income from the commercial seal hunt.

"A Canadian senator wants to put an end to the commercial seal hunt. Mac Harb, who represents the Ottawa area, will introduce a bill in the Senate today which would end the hunt."-Tom Henderson 03/03/09

[updated Tue Mar 03 08:28:16 EST 2009]

Harper is threatening another election. 8 months ago the P.M. broke his own fixed date election law because the opposition would not let him pass his agenda without seeing it first. Now he wants a $3 billion slush fund to spend on CPC ridings with no accountability ahead of time. Do we want to allow more bailouts that will accomplish nothing until the global economy is repaired . We are an exporting nation and throwing money out the window will not help our exports. We must call Harper on this blackmail of the Canadian public. Let's go back to the polls and get rid of him for the good of the country.

[updated Tue Mar 03 17:48:13 EST 2009]

Accountablity, Harper style:

One of Harper's Ministers is now being subpoenaed to see what his role was in the bribery of an Ottawa Mayoral candidate. Not to mention, we have yet to hear a ruling as to whether the Conservative Party stole the 2006 election by illegally funding target ridings in the "In-and-out" scandal.

Feb 28, 2009 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (39)
James Travers Toronto Star

"Stephen Harper says he's ready to fight an election over a Conservative slush fund."

[updated Tue Mar 03 20:15:58 EST 2009]

It would appear that Harper is playing defense to Iggy's offense and appears to be in a desperate attempt to make the playoffs but can't get out of his own zone.

The language today from iggy was brilliant and has probably left Harper befuddled as he was actually told to be accountabile to the people, with the leader of the opposition and effectively the majority of MP's in the house.

I think Iggy is now playing with Harper like a toy.

[updated Tue Mar 03 21:52:37 EST 2009]

Stephen Harper is making the case that while his government has been dealing with the economic crisis, the opposition parties have been scheming to seize power.

Quite the reverse is the case: while the Harper government should have been mapping out a plan to cope with the onset of recession, its members have been busy sticking pins in the opposition parties as well as in that perennial object of right-wing fury, the civil service. Now they are spending their energy on attack ads.

In truth, the members of the Harper government are economic incompetents. They can't keep their eye on the economic ball. What a disaster.

[updated Tue Mar 03 22:49:39 EST 2009]

Next campaign why the Liberals are running scared.

No money, between $ 2-6 million in debt.
Their unelected leader is untested and fails to connect outside the chattering class in "elititsts" circles.

Liberals can't attack George Bush anymore, Iggy was his cheerleader!

Liberals have ZERO credibility on the environment or the economy. Iggy the father of the Carbon Tax has shafted the Green Shift trying to win "rural votes". The party has failed to win any support in rural Canada. His uncle's farm in the only safe liberal kitchen table. They are hoping to have Harper wear the global recession. They are now delaying relief and reading newspaper clippings asking Harper to apologize for the unemployment and GDP figures.

Iggy is now a cheerleader for the Oilsands! I am sure Canadians are buying into that sales pitch. I heard he will be writing a book on how his uncle uses the "dirty oil" to drive that tractor. Iggy reminds me of the Donkey in Shrek, Pick me!
Liberals acknowledge they WONT win a single seat out west but the political subsisdy is very important to help pay for their debts. That $ 1.95 is important.

Desperation is running rampants as many liberals are realizing the next campaign will thin the herd further. The liberal apologists on this board are "citing" the GREAT polls regarding Quebec as proof positive how they will win the next election.

Oh Happy Days! -Broadbent singing on parliament Hill during the coalition power grab rings in my mind.

Since the Liberals won't keep their unelected Senators from bashing the commercial NFLD seal hunt, Bill C 10, immigration it is time to remind them OCT 2008 was not a blip. It is a trend on the demise of the party that has failed to provide any sensibilities or rebuild.

[updated Wed Mar 04 07:41:31 EST 2009]

The Harper government's mismanagement and BS grows by the day.

Flaherty said: "The Liberal opposition members said they were going to support it [the budget]. The budget implementation bill is still in the House today on March 3. Not one penny of stimulus has gone out to the Canadians who need the help."

The finance minister, of all people, knows full well that spending fiscal stimulus before April 1 is illegal.

His prorogue of parliment didn't hold up stimulus at all didi it? He is not telling the truht here and trying to cover up his mismanagement.

When Flaherty says Ontario is the last place to invest, when he lurches from claims of balanced budgets in November, which nobody believed, to $84 billion in deficits two months later, how can he possibly instill Canadians with a much needed sense of confidence at this moment of economic crisis?

Disaster of a government

[updated Wed Mar 04 09:04:44 EST 2009]

When Flaherty says Ontario is the last place to invest, when he lurches from claims of balanced budgets in November, which nobody believed, to $84 billion in deficits two months later, how can he possibly instill Canadians with a much needed sense of confidence at this moment of economic crisis?

When the Conservatives are defeated, Harper will have himself and his foolish hardball tactics to blame.

[updated Wed Mar 04 09:27:05 EST 2009]

A report forecasting a $13-billion deficit next year – even before the Harper government’s plans to include billions in economic stimulus measures in the budget – reinforces the fiscal mismanagement of the Conservatives

Stephen Harper consistently told Canadians they would have a surplus as late as the November 27th economic update,. And yet our starting point going into this recession is a $13-billion deficit. This government was headed into the red but was not upfront with Canadians.

I look forward to an election, so I can turf these dishonest guys out once and for all.

[updated Wed Mar 04 10:45:08 EST 2009]

Harper broke the law.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson proclaimed that Bill C-16 spelled the end of election manipulation for the governing party's partisan benefit. In Harper's own words: "Fixed election dates prevent governments from calling snap elections for short-term political advantage. They level the playing field for all parties and the rules are clear for everybody."

Clearly, the Prime Minister's convictions have changed. Apparently, election manipulation is now OK again in Harper's books.

Don't do as I do, do as I say!

Wow, that's Strong Leadership.

[updated Wed Mar 04 13:22:44 EST 2009]

Remember Rae geting taunted by Harper for trying to spend his way out of the early 90's recession? Wow, 15 years later and Harper is now copying the Ontario NDP government policy.

Harper is eating his vitriol all over the place these days.

[updated Wed Mar 04 13:54:30 EST 2009]

I place the blame for the initial $18 billion deficit squarely onto Mr Harper's shoulders. Two straight years of bad tax and spending policies have destroyed the monetary cushion we Canadians had that we could've used on to weather out the economic storm.

If Harper's trying to divorce himself from the coming deficit, I ain't gonna allow it. Harper, the $18 billion deficit is your fault. It ain't because of the recession. It's your policies that had landed us all in this position. Harper, the deficit is your fault. Let me repeat, Harper's deficit. Harper's fault.

[updated Wed Mar 04 14:52:15 EST 2009]

Liberals are imploding and will back down unfortunately. Another lesson in humility for the new leader, Dion must be laughing. The Gaffes keep coming!

Liberal Senator musing how the liberals will lose control again of the regional MP's and create a BLOC regional voting parrty.

Great job on Iggy with his "symbolic vote" and one time pass.

Another liberal who will fail to become a PM.

[updated Wed Mar 04 18:56:15 EST 2009]

The End of Canadian Conservatism: How Harper sold out to save himself

Andrew Coyne, MacLean's Magazine

Say what you like about the Tories: they don’t do things by halves. When they spend, they spend. When they go into debt, they do it $100 billion at a time. And when they decide to finish off what remains of conservatism in Canada—as a movement, as a philosophy—they go out with a bang.

Two points are worth noting about this latest explosion in what was already a supernova of spending. One is the sheer aimlessness of it. Supposedly the government’s dilemma was how to balance short-term “stimulus” with the need to improve the economy’s productive capacity in the long run—a contradiction to begin with, since the kind of spending that can be shovelled out the door in time to claim credit for the recovery is unlikely to be subject to especially searching scrutiny, such as would ensure these funds were put to their highest and best use. But the laundry list of spending in this budget shows scant evidence of any thinking at all.

I'm not voting for this sell-out.

[updated Wed Mar 04 19:53:10 EST 2009]