thought

harper was pretty blatantly exposed by duceppe this morning. it will be hard for him to spin that, if at all.

LX

did he make it clear that he had a signed agreement with Harper? Because if that's what you're talking about then that came out the last time around.

And it's not going to matter. It'll likely help Harper. Because the dude does not want to put out any kind of platform, nor debate any real issues. He wants to make his accusations which are basically flat-out lies and distortions, and keep the other guys from being able to do anything but defend themselves against bullshit. That's how it's done in the good old USA, and Harper has learned very well from his friends like Ralph Reed. Surely only good government can result from that.

LX

That's what I was talking about earlier. I listened to him this morning and it seemed like every sentence was a lie. Even he couldn't take it anymore and had to correct himself and change the word legitimate to principled.

And when you consider that everything he claims to be railing against is something he took much farther, with an attempt to come to power solely with the separatists, and giving them a place in the cabinet. Fuck me. He could come out and say that it was something they had looked at doing, but that in the end it is just not something that the people of Canada find acceptable. That would be something that can be taken as arguably true. But he has to go the extra mile and repeat lie after lie, just as he did when he shut down Parliament twice.

In the end I still doubt that it matters all that much, but it's such a terrible, and really undemocratic approach to election campaigns, that it's disturbing as hell.

LX

I found this old article from the globe regarding bank mergers. It seems that it has been a succession of minority governments that has held them back, and that the "political game" revolves around a majority being needed in order for the banks to start bulldozing the somewhat stable economy we've enjoyed, and start blowing up bubbles.

It would seem that minority might not be such a dirty word, and that it has been what has kept us from handing much of our power as citizens over to the financial sector.

Now listen to Harper pushing for a majority, and stressing his economic action plan. This is the guy that pushed hard for profits from derivatives and currency transactions not be taxed, not just here, but worldwide. Who is he going to represent if he wins a majority? The same question should be asked of all the candidates, as Martin would have likely handed power over to finance had he enjoyed majority status.

Bill Haverchuck

Yeah, that there sounds like our Obama. *southern accent*

Oh, wait, you're talking about Iggy. Sorry, my mistake. Same playbook, different border.

pzabby

correct me if im wrong but the american democrats are farther right on the political scale than our conservatives, let alone our liberals..

Bill Haverchuck

Hmm...I think you might have missed the point of my joke. I was commenting on some of the similarities I see in the way the Republicans and Conservatives paint their opponents (Iggy and Obama). That's all.

As for your question, in my humble opinion, your analysis is somewhat correct, but it's a little more complicated than that.

In the United States, the center is further to the right than it is in Canada. And since the U.S. has a two pary system, the Democrats end up having to market themselves to a big tent. They need support from the "left" and at least some from the "center". At the state level, some of the voters whom the Democrats try to appeal to are more left leaning than some Canadian Liberals, yet, at the same time, at the fedeal level, the Democrats can't win without gaining the center. Many voters located at the center of the American political spectrum would probably vote conservative in Canada. But the Democrats also have support from, and try to appeal to, some people you'd probably never find voting for Harper (union workers, civil rights activists, etc...).

Policy wise, at the federal level, the Democrats can be pretty conservative. But that's not the way all Americans view them. It's relative. And the Republicans try to exagerate some of the differences and make the Dems seem more left leaning, like the claims that they are socialist, which is completely laughable.

pzabby

but isnt that what politics is all about? undermining your opponent and dishing out bullshit promises to win the election?

'trane

i sure as hell hope we can do better than that.

Bill Haverchuck

Um, it doesn't have to be, especially if the media refuses to repeat ridiculous information. If the you have decent media and the electorate is not dumb as shit, then voters will be able to see through claims that Omaba (for example) is a "foreigner", a "socialist", and an "elitist". Part of the reason that stuff has so much traction in the U.S. is because the media helps give it traction and the voters are not educated enough to critically assess political messages.

In Canada, I'd like to believe the situation is better, but there still could be more accountability/awareness.



+1

pzabby

yes the situation is better, but with the amercanization of canada by "harper's government" we arent very far from what many canadians see as a poisonous system. Canada had a nice balance of social help and corporate help.. i miss that

Ligeia

Canada’s Children’s Fitness Tax Credit – The Rich Get Richer? | Obesity Panacea


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...rticle1968880/

Benzo

Urggg...why do people need tax credits to make their kids active? Seriously at what point do people start taking responsibility for some things themselves, ITS CALLED GO OUTSIDE.

'trane

also creates the opportunity of accusing your opponents of being against improved health for our children if they oppose the credits. the fine art of creating policy to undermine your opponents position as part of a bubble campaign.

Benzo

So glad you didn't place that on any imparticular party, they all figgen do it.

Ligeia

I'm against these tax credits because I find them disingenuous. They are framed as a solution to a particular problem but actually compound the issue.

I'm not, broadly speaking, against some sort of economic reward for activities that will lead to better wellness. In our health care system, I think it is entirely legitimate to encourage citizens to lower our aggregate health care costs.

I agree that we shouldn't need to have such rewards, but that may be the reality we're looking at.

Benzo

People rely too much on government, look for other people to blame for their own problems, get out and run, its cheap.

When I was very young my mother couldn't afford to put me in sports, no chance I could afford hockey gear untill I started getting the hand me downs.

Get this though, everyday after school I would be doing something, Baseball, Road Hockey, Soccer....now replaced by PS3, MSN messanger and youtube.

pzabby

or school work, school work, and more school work. i swear the workloads increased from the past. i have on average one all nighter a week .

Bill Haverchuck

In high school? WTF?

pzabby

yea.. fucked up shit aint it?