$1:
Its good that you see it. Now despite your opinion of me you are too new to remember the days when I touted the Liberals and CPC working togeather as the 2 parties reprsesenting the most Canadians.
I have no "opinion" of you one way or the other. I don't even know you. You're some guy somewhere in Canada who posts about politics on an obscure website. Same as me. Let's not make this personal.
$1:
Harper has pushed me firmly into the Lib-NDP-Green camp.
We differ here. I'm not in any "camp." While I enjoy watching the cut and thrust of the political game, it's not like following a hockey team. I change my loyalties according to the issues and the circumstances. At the moment, I think the Conservatives are the best equipped to govern with the best plan. But the Libs have been in that position before, and may be again.
$1:
Were I a con I'd be looking in Peter Mackays direction right about now,
I wouldn't. I think Mckay is a fool. He was immature when he cried on TV during the Belinda debacle, and was a complete embarrassment when he gushed like a schoolgirl and declared himself a "fan" of Condeleeza Rice during her visit last year.
$1:
The voice thing was rhetoric countering other rhetoric. Of course the coalition is about politics and defeating Harper just as the unite the right movement.
Fair enough. Initially, I got the impression you were a bit of a kool-aid drinker, but rhetorical debate is part of the game in both the political process and on boards like this.
But personally, I'm not one to engage in it.
$1:
While the NDP may feel they hold the balance they should come back to reality. At Laytons strongest showing yet and a weak Liberal party giving them votes he came nowhere near forming the official opposition as some had thought and/or hoped. In true Canadian fashion he did not even medal coming in 4th place.
That may be the case, but right now, Mike Duffy is reporting that the NDP is asking the Libs for 5-6 seats in cabinet in exchange for their support. They initially were demanding the high-profile position of finance minister, if you can believe it! That's not likely to happen at this stage, but they will probably get industry, and some other choice jobs.
That's an awful lot of influence for a party that "didn't even medal" as you say.
$1:
When its all said and done, Harper has done a piss-poor job over the last year or so and every step of the way doing things he decried the Liberals did. Chretiens helo cancellation is still cried about yet try getting the cons to admit Harpers cancellation of the JSS, icebreakers, northern bases, SAR aircraft, etc is just as bad.
I think, all things considered, he's run a fairly decent government. I think the GST cuts were a mistake, but apart from that, I don't have many problems with anything he's done.
$1:
In the end Harper had the chance to be a leader, the kind of leader that decides the country comes first and the voters will should be followed. His first legislation of the new term and he has us either facing a new election in short order or else being toppled unilaterially by a coalition govt.
Thats not leadership.
You've got a point here. While I agree with most of the principals of the economic statement, his decision to kick the opposition parties in the teeth by cutting off election financing was partisan and divisive. He believed the opposition would cave, and now at this stage, it looks like they've rallied and are going to try and bring him down.
A constitutional crisis is not what Canada needs during these uncertain times, and Harper is responsible for causing it.