Showing posts with label Canadian federal election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canadian federal election. Show all posts

Monday, May 02, 2011

Election - Post-Game Thoughts


So, there we have it: the Cons have a majority government. The NDP is the official opposition. Iggy led the Liberal party to a historic low in the house. The BQ is all but decimated and, at this point, Elizabeth May of the Greens might have won a seat for her party - finally. (Update - she won.)

Polls showed last week that the Big Orange Surge towards the NDP was a force but no one predicted this tsunami.

Ignatieff, who may have lost his seat at the time of this writing, (update: he lost it) was never an inspiring figure and I've wasted several pixels on my opinion of him on this blog through the years since he was anointed by the Libs. I never saw him as a potential prime minister and now, most of the country has told him that at the voting booth. As for the Liberal party, when you stand for mushy-middle centrism, you get what you deserve: a yawn and a wave goodbye.

Layton? Not my favourite person either - especially when he propped up the Cons in the past - but he deserves congratulations for leading his party to this monumental win. The NDP has more seats in parliament than they probably imagined they could have pulled off and the stark contrast between real left and right parties will make for very interesting times.

The BQ loss in Quebec shows a sea change in public opinion. I'm not surprised that so many Quebecois chose the NDP - not after watching the constant opposition to Canada's participation in the Afghanistan war. That province has often leaned more left than most others. I have to say that I admired Gilles' Duceppe's political skills. He's been quite adept. But - he lost his seat and now his party doesn't have enough seats for minority party status. That era is over. (Update: he resigned.)

As for Steve? Haven't we had ENOUGH of him? Now that he has majority power, we may be in for some seriously authoritarian moves (okay, even more of them than he's pulled so far). He doesn't have a hidden agenda. He's just never had enough power to ram it through. Layton and his new, large band of MPs are going to have their work cut out for them. I cringe at some of the right-wing crap this government will now feel very free to foist upon Canada. But - let them do it. Perhaps they'll push it just a little too far - as some of the wingnuts have recently done in the states. They may just end up hoisting themselves on their own petard. Cons always seem to manage that when they have absolute power. (Mulroney, anyone?)
 

Election Nite!


Will Jack Layton be our new overlord?

Will Michael Ignatieff's ego finally implode?

Will Stephen Harper cry like a baby?

Is this Gilles' last stand?

Will Elizabeth May finally get a seat in the house?

Stay tuned!

Live online coverage:

CPAC

CBC

Canuck newspapers listed on the left <<<<<<<

Popcorn!

Monday, October 20, 2008

Stephane Dion: 'I failed.'

The big Canadian news of the day is that Liberal leader Stephane Dion will resign once a new leader is chosen. Dion acknowledged that the Liberal party was unable to sell its Green Shift plan to Canadians and blamed the Conservatives for framing him as someone he wasn't through their use of negative campaigning.

He also said the Conservatives had a "massive financial advantage" to "distort" his Green Shift plan and that the Liberals did not have the resources to fight back "given our existing financial crisis."

"It has been a mistake to go ahead with the Green Shift because we are not equipped to explain what it was," he said.

Dion said Tory "propaganda" about the plan was cemented in the minds of Canadians and "was the main reason why we lost."

Here's the deal: the Liberals unveiled a novel platform that they simply didn't have time to sell properly - despite the amount of money and "propaganda" the Cons employed. We have short election campaigns. That's a fact of life.

Secondly, the Liberals' campaign was disjointed, focused too much on Dion, and was continually playing catch up. The Cons waited until the last week to spring their platform on Canadians who didn't even have time to digest it. Their message was simply, 'trust Steve' and, for many voters, that worked. It wasn't a brilliant strategy since they still have a minority government but it was enough to convince at least some Canadians to turn to the Cons like a warm glass of milk before bed time after a long stressful day.

Thirdly, as I've said before, I really don't think the Liberals' 'vote for us - we're centrists' was a winning message. People understand left and right, liberal and conservative. Centrism is what, exactly? Just how many left-leaning voters did the party sacrifice to that meme - even if the fact that they are centrists is the truth?

So, regardless of the nice guy that he is, Dion has to go. Let's hope the Liberals don't take absolutely forever again to choose his successor. I damn near pulled my hair out the last time around - not because I'm a Liberal, I'm not. These long leadership races (like the excruciatingly nails-on-a-chalkboard-like race in the US) are wearing and are enough to make even seasoned political veterans want to take a vacation in some place peaceful by comparison - like Iraq.
 

Friday, October 17, 2008

What would you do with $300 million?

The CBC's Quirks & Quarks guy, Bob McDonald, has a post up on his blog listing some of the things he'd do with the $300 million that the last useless election cost Canadians:

Our latest federal election, which effectively changed nothing, is estimated to have cost somewhere around $300 million. After playing with my calculator, here’s a short list of what else we could have done with that money:


* Built 3 planetariums or major science museums.

* Built 4 research laboratories for alternative clean energy.

* Installed 100 wind turbines.

* Provided full university scholarships for 6, 000 students — $50,000 each.
* Provided clean drinking water to northern communities.

* Built 10 high schools.

* Built three regional hospitals.

* Funded 100 13-part educational television series.

* Sent me on 10 tourist flights to the International Space Station.

This is just a partial list; I invite you to add to it. Have fun with your calculator and think hard about where some of our government spending priorities really lie.

What would you do with that enormous amount on money?

My list would start with one huge cheesecake to munch on while I tried to imagine where else to splurge.
 

Friday Fun: Canuck the Vote

From The Daily Show:


 

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Another Fine Mess

During his victory speech on Tuesday nite, Mr 'I have to call an election because parliament is dysfunctional' Harper said, "we know how to make a minority government work". Cognitive dissonance anyone? Or, more plainly said, lies?

The local CTV station reported here on Wednesday that they've been getting a lot of calls and e-mails (and remember - this is a staunchly Conservative city) asking why an election was held in the first place. They should be calling Harper for that answer. Comments in the Calgary Herald echo that anger.

CTV also showed a clip of Harper laughing about the fact that he's basically been Mr Non-stop Campaigning Man the last 6 years. That's something to boast about? After he just cost Canadians $300 million for an unnecessary and non-game-changing election?

And, once again, Alberta had the lowest voter turnout in the country. Maybe if some of those Conservative sheeple actually cared about those hundreds of millions of wasted dollars, they would have shown that by kicking out these useless bastards. But Dog forbid Canada should turn socialist - never mind that Harper is planning on sinking billions into the banks in a socialist kind of way. Cognitive dissonance abides. Maybe they should be forced to hold telethons instead.

The only bright lite in this province last nite shone from Edmonton-Strathcona where NDP candidate Linda Duncan took the seat from Rahim Jaffer. (Who can forget Rick Mercer's "will the real Rahim Jaffer please stand up?" Jaffer should have been turfed for that fraud when it happened.) CBC reports that Jaffer is asking for a "review" of Tuesday's results - not a formal recount though. Regardless, buh bye.

On the Liberal side, we now have to put up with yet another round of leadership races once Dion is convinced to step aside or is forced to do so. There's no way he'll survive this:

Stéphane Dion's future as Liberal Leader is the key post-ballot question as final results from Tuesday's election show his party sank to its lowest level of popular support since Confederation.

Ouch. Buh bye to you too, Stephane.

We all know what the next however many months until the next election will look like: continued verbal food fights in the house highlighted by willful mental constipation and verbal diarrhea. In other words, meet the new parliament, same as the old one. No one even bothered to talk about anything like "restoring dignity" to the place this time around. They all know what a farce that is. They can't help themselves so why bother? If you're really looking to invest in stocks of some kind to get through the coming recession, stock up on popcorn for Question Period. At least popcorn is still affordable, unlike so many other things.

Yes, it's just another fine mess and the "fine" descriptor is certainly questionable. Thanks, Ollie Steve.

Related:

Complete riding results from CBC.
Voter turnout lowest on record (59.1% nationally)

Update:

The Calgary Herald reports that Nfld/Labrador had the country's lowest voter turnout. Alberta was next in line.

"I don't think any of us have really clear ideas as to why that is happening," Harper said.

Seriously, Steve? Mon dieu. Talk about clueless.

 

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Election Nite Open Thread & Liveblogging



So, here we are. Finally.

I asked 3 people today if they were going to vote.

The first one said she didn't think it would make any difference.

The second, a store owner, said, "I'm not happy". His main issue is crime and punishment because of the gang violence and he was quite adamant that the person whose recent gunshot blinded an innocent victim in Calgary should be forced to donate his eyes and to "live in darkness" for life. I didn't have to guess who he might have voted for and I told him that I believe in karma instead.

The third, a young clerk, said of voting, "I don't care for it. Sorry." Well, I didn't think he needed to apologize to me and I told him that not voting was his right.

I voted and, like the store owner I spoke to, I'm not happy either. I know the Conservative candidate Deepak Obhrai will win again in my riding and I actually didn't decide to vote until yesterday - not because his win is assured but because I'm not satisfied with any of the parties.

So, here we are.

I'll be following the Election Act on this site:

“No person shall transmit the result or purported result of the vote in an electoral district to the public in another electoral district before the close of all of the polling stations in that other electoral district.”

In other words:



I welcome whatever's on your mind about tonite's happenings but any comments that violate that act (or the counting of the holy hand grenade) will be deleted.

Laugh, cry, yell, dance...have at it.

I'll post updates as they come in.

Reminder: There are 308 seats and winning 155 constitutes a majority.

Results:

Atlantic Canada

- The Cons lost 3 seats in Nfld/Labrador.
- Peter MacKay won his seat beating Elizabeth May, who came in second, by some 5,000 votes.
- Independent Bill Casey won his seat.
- According to CBC, the Grits and Tories are both down 4 seats (?) in the region.
- The Cons won a seat in PEI for the first time since 1984.
- Conservatives shut out by ABC campaign in N.L., make gains in N.B., P.E.I.

The Liberals were set to hold on to 17 seats out of Atlantic Canada's 32 ridings in Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia as of about 10 p.m. ET.

The Conservatives earned 10 seats and the New Democrats took four. One Independent will also be going to Ottawa from the region.

In the 2006 election, the Liberals won 20 seats, the Conservatives nine and the NDP had three.

10:45 ET from Elections Canada

Leading: Cons 142; Popular Vote 36.7%
Leading: Libs 78; Popular Vote 28.6%
Leading: BQ 47; Popular Vote 7.1%
Leading: N.D.P. 29; Popular Vote 19.6%
Leading: Other 3; Popular Vote 8.0%

Total: 299; 100%

CBC projects a MINORITY Conservative government. (Take that, Steve!)

11:55 ET from Elections Canada:

Leading: Cons 143; Popular Vote 37.4%
Leading: Libs 76; Popular Vote 26.7%
Leading: BQ 50; Popular Vote 10.1%
Leading: NDP 37; Popular Vote 18.0%
Leading: Other 2; Popular Vote 7.8%

Total: 308; 100%

For comparison's sake:

2006 results

Cons 124; Libs 103; BQ 51; NDP 29; Other 1

More from Elections Canada:

Polls reporting: 61,438/69,632
Voter turnout: 11,875,370 of 23,401,064 registered electors (50.8%)

more to come...
 

Harper's Secret Bank Bailout Deal

How's this for transparency?

As Canadians go to the polls, the Conservatives have privately told the country's biggest banks they are ready to step in and guarantee new borrowing because of fears financial institutions will be frozen out of international credit markets for "months," according to people familiar with the discussions.

The extraordinary pledge was made behind closed doors after Canada's banks disclosed they were being starved of desperately-needed financing and could not continue to fund normal operations without government help, despite signs of a rebound in stock markets.
[...]
Confirmed on the eve of the election, the implicit public guarantee of private debt by the Conservatives represents a historic departure from free-market principles and signals a profound loss of confidence in the global banking system.

It means Ottawa is prepared to publicly guarantee repayment of any new money banks borrow from each other and from foreign banks, to make sure Canada's financial institutions do not fall behind their peers.
[...]
Stephen Harper, the Conservative leader, is reluctant to officially declare this policy, but is likely to do so if Washington moves first because of the detrimental impact a U.S.-only guarantee could have on Canada's financial institutions.

Before pulling the trigger, the Conservatives first aim to try and meet the funding needs of Bay Street directly by aggressively expanding a scheme to buy up mortgages from banks.

After initially putting up $25 billion of public money to buy mortgages, the Department of Finance is prepared to increase that limit as needed up to $225 billion, at which point the risk of taxpayer losses starts to rise sharply.

After spending weeks trying to reassure Canadians that "the fundamentals of the economy are solid", it's obvious that Stephen Harper has completely misjudged the impact of the global economic meltdown in our country and has lied to us about the state of our financial institutions. The fact that he and his incompetent finance minister Flaherty have chosen to use vague, lofty and nasty rhetoric to fool Canadians into believing that the Conservatives are best suited to handle this crisis is an absolute sham.

Unfortunately, the news of this secret bailout deal comes on a day when we're headed to the polls with virtually no time for fiscal, free market conservatives to examine how this might affect their support of a federal government that is violating, in their estimation, core conservative principles. It's also an insult to swing voters who've moved towards the Conservative party after being told that every other party is bound to destroy our economy.

Just one more slap in the face brought to you by Harper and the Conservatives. Whether this is a necessary move or not is debatable. What isn't, however, is the fact that this has been dropped in our laps on election day by way of leaks to the media.

Related:

Bush Defends Government Bank Investment
 
 

Monday, October 13, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 37

Happy Thanksgiving, my fellow politically-disgruntled Canadians. Turkey for dinner tonite. Turkeys to vote for tomorrow. At least the dinner comes with mashed potatoes and gravy - palatable extras that we just can't seem to find in our politicians. Let's hope one of the other major party leaders makes dessert out of Harper since he fancies himself to be a fruit.

I was pondering today whether Canada needs a longer campaign season. Yes, I know that would involve an increase in the already insanely excessive election budgets of Elections Canada and the parties but as I've watched the downward trend of the Cons, I've wondered if more damage might have been done to their party if the other parties had had more time. I'm also aware that there was, apparently, a little spike upwards for the Cons over the weekend but if Steve had been given even more time to shoot himself in the foot, especially as he has in Quebec, might his fortunes have been diminished? Hard to know. Lastly, would an extended campaign season increase interest and participation in our elections as more Canadians had a longer stretch of time to really study and discuss each party's platform?

As it stands now, and as I've written before (yesterday, for example), too many people vote based on ideology that the politicians they choose don't even stand for anymore. That is a problem and is one of my core complaints about singularly devoted partisanship that forgives far too much when parties don't live up to their agendas. That's why I'm now an independent. I don't expect perfection but I do expect meaningful battles - not political games - to push for more civil and human rights and justice.

None of the current leaders exhibit anything nearing greatness. They're all very milquetoast characters who are too willing to compromise core principles for political gamesmanship. I'm not talking about rigid ideology here - just some passion for really helping Canadians to live a better life. It is our government, after all.

I'm sure as I write this that there are partisans reading who are thinking unequivocally that their leader is exactly what I've described. I've chronicled that belief in writing about the US election. We don't need shiny objects and we deserve to be treated as intelligent voters who absolutely refuse to be lied to anymore. But, if we don't demand that, as George Bernard Shaw wrote:

Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.

I guess we'll find out what we deserve on Tuesday nite. Enjoy your turkey(s).
 

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 36

I'm suffering from an attack of WMT: Weapons of Mass Turkey, so I'll keep this one short.

One more day of campaigning and then those of us who give a damn are off to the polls. Although there are certainly those of us who give a damn who aren't going to vote as well, considering the lousy options. As I've said before, I'd rather see an educated non-voter than an uneducated voter. I think we have far too many of the latter who just think they're following their ideology while they vote for people and parties who don't even really represent them.

How many times have you heard someone identify themselves as a conservative because they like small government while they ignore the huge government bureaucracies their parties have created? And during this time of financial turmoil, one in which nobody seems to know exactly what to do (how's that $700bn American bailout working out so far?), can we trust any of the major political parties who are all connected to the system to really look out for the best interests of the peasants? Obviously not. They all lie and they're all corrupted in one way or another by the smell of power. Grim, but that's where we are.

Elections Canada spent $277.8 million on the 2004 general election.
[...]
This time around, Stephen Harper's election call cancelled four by-elections which were set for September. According to Elections Canada, a federal by-election costs an average of 892,000 per riding. That means taxpayers will pay $3.5 million for the cancelled by-elections, since spending tallies are restarted once a general election is called.
source

How's that for so-called smart, Conservative fiscal management? And Stephen Harper, who initiated this unnecessary election with the hope of winning a majority, decided that gambling away hundreds of millions of our dollars was worth it - all for the sake of his overblown ego.

Call it fate or karma or whatever you will but, whatever it is, it looks like it's about to hit him in the ass on Tuesday. The only saving grace in yet another minority government under Harper is that his more right-wing tendencies can be kept in check. Do we really need a leader again who has to be tempered by the opposition because, if allowed, his social and fiscal conservatism would no doubt run wild? Haven't we got better ways to spend our precious time, money and resources?
 

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 35

Just 3 more sleeps until we know if Harper is toast. Can I just add that I'm glad I haven't been doing daily updates on the never-ending US election campaign? My head would have exploded long ago.

Alrighty, well this has to be the quote du jour (h/t Danielle Takacs):

Stephen Harper, looking to stem the dramatic slide of his party in Quebec, reassured Quebecers on Saturday that he is not the "devil incarnate."

Hahaha. Wow. You know things are bad when you have to try to convince people you're not Satan.

Obviously poor Steve was having a really bad Luciferish kind of day:

Earlier Saturday, in London, Ont., Harper scoffed at the possibility a Conservative government would have to cut programs to balance the budget if the economy continues to slump.

"This is a ridiculous hypothetical scenario," Harper told reporters when asked what his priorities would be in terms of program cuts.

"What it really comes down to is you're asking me to say what would Canada do if our economy went to hell in a handbasket. This government is running the economy so it can't go to hell in a handbasket."

And with that, he grabbed his pitchfork and made his way out the door.

I was quite surprised this afternoon to see the covers of the Calgary Sun and the Calgary Herald both carrying prominent doom and gloom stories about the economy. This is, after all, Harper country. But you know how Con supporters are around these parts, you could prove that Steve is the "devil incarnate" and they'd still vote for him anyway. Partisanship kills crucial brain cells.

On the heels of the revelation that the Cadman tape was not doctored, Dion is after Steve to explain himself.

Harper sued the Liberals for defamation in 2008 based on comments on their website about the situation with Cadman.

Harper said the tape had been edited, but a court-appointed expert in the defamation case reported Friday that the key portions that the prime minister had contested contain "neither physical nor electronic splices, edits or alterations."

Harper needs to explain "what he meant when he said on the tape that Conservative officials offered Mr. Cadman financial considerations for his vote," Dion said.

You betcha. That might have done a bit more damage if it had been revealed earlier in the campaign.

Poll smoking: Decline in support spells minority government for Tories: poll

Nationally, the poll of 1,000 Canadians conducted on Friday suggests the Conservatives had the support of 35 per cent of decided voters. That's down from the 39 per cent that the party garnered when the same poll was conducted on Sept. 28 and 29.

The Liberals climbed from 24 per cent to 28 per cent over the same period while the NDP remained steady at 19 per cent and the Green Party fell from 10 per cent to 9 per cent.
[...]
Other polls conducted over the past two or three days had different numbers for the national race. Harris-Decima put the Conservatives at 36 per cent across the country and the Liberals at 25 per cent, a gain of one point for the Tories and a loss of one point for the Grits.

A Nanos Research survey, meanwhile, suggested that there was just a four-point spread between the two parties, with the Conservatives at 32 per cent and the Liberals at 28 per cent. The New Democrats were selected by 22 per cent of respondents in that poll while the Green were chosen by 8 per cent.

As always, it's hard to know which is the most accurate poll so try not to bite your nails too much the next couple of days (especially if you're a carpenter).

To the bunker! Harper's handlers warn he may no longer take questions from media. [insert more laughter here]

Photo credit: Reuters
 

Friday, October 10, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 34

Tonite's election news is brought to you by Pink Floyd:



'Nuff said.
 

On the Globe and Mail's Endorsement...

I might be annoyed by the Globe & Mail's (underwhelming) endorsement of Stephen Harper if their so-called reasoning wasn't so incredibly laughable (and if I cared about newspaper editorial boards endorsing candidates). Really. I don't know how anyone familiar with Harper could possibly read that drivel and take it seriously.

Paraphrasing: Oh sure he's mean and nasty but he's keeping his emotions in check (if you don't count his pit bull temper and think prime ministers should be soulless automatons). And he hasn't pushed his right-wing extremist Reform-style roots (because apparently he's reformed - forget about the fact that he's had to dial it back because he led a minority government).

I don't know. What can you say about the G&M's editors when they throw out illogical assumptions like this?

Some Liberals already have taken aim at Mr. Dion in the midst of the campaign, but they should engage in a more sophisticated diagnostic. The party-writ-large has failed to reinvent itself for the 21st century and public opinion research shows, perhaps as a result, that fewer and fewer Canadians identify themselves as "liberal."

That's a big "perhaps" and they had to word it that way because what they've tried to do is to lump "liberals" with "Liberals". Those of us in tune with media and conservative manipulation know better. I'm not a Liberal party supporter anymore because they made the wrong decision when it came to endorsing Canada's involvement in the Afghanistan war, but I certainly haven't dropped the "liberal" identifier as a result. Why? Because being "liberal" and "Liberal" are two different things. You'd think the G&M's editors would know that that dog just won't hunt but I guess when you choose to support such an incompetent candidate as Stephen Harper for prime minister, the kitchen sink strategy and shaded nuance is really all you have.

As for failing to "reinvent itself", I'd say the Green Shift plan is a huge change. What's Steve offering that's so breathtakingly different? Absolutely nothing.

The absurdity continues:

Meanwhile, the supposedly obstinate Mr. Harper has been nothing if not open to adjusting as circumstances change. He was masterful in building a "big tent" centre-right alternative to the "natural governing" Liberals. His vision, determination and adroitness restored political competition to Canada, not an insignificant accomplishment.

Open? Adroitness? He hid the fact that Afghan detainees were being tortured. He hid the real cost of the war. His buddies continually shut down committee business as they were instructed to via a 200-page Tory manual that outlined how best to disrupt committees. He's hidden from the press. He's muzzled his own cabinet members and MPs. He lied about the income trust promise. Do I have to go on? I sure don't think so. It's all been very heavily documented and stories about the way he's mismanaged his authority have even been broken by G&M reporters.

Mr. Harper has done well on other fronts, too. He has spoken with refreshing candour and courage on foreign affairs, especially on the Middle East,

And there it is: Israel. Is that one of the main reasons the G&M board members prefer Harper? They agree (as James Laxer pointed out in July 2006) that the decimation of Lebanon, which Harper called a "measured response", was entirely acceptable. Most of the rest of us don't.

And just how courageous was it to parrot John Howard talking points supporting the illegal Iraq war? That's not courage. That's dangerously flawed neocon ideology.

Regardless, I will not succumb to calls in the Canadian blogosphere by Liberals, liberals and others to boycott the G&M. Some of their reporting has been invaluable - especially about what this Conservative government has attempted to keep from the public about the war and human rights abuses. We need all of the investigative reporting we can get in this country. As with all media sources, we need to read and watch with a critical eye.

I'd suggest that those opposed to Harper and his party boycott Mike Duffy's show and his sponsors instead. Low blows like that should not be rewarded. And it's quite ironic that the G&M's editorial was published the same day that Harper et al took their campaign (even more) into the gutter. It wasn't planned that way, that we know of, but it definitely makes the G&M board look more than a little less insightful today, to say the least. Or maybe they're all snickering behind the scenes about what happened. Who knows? I do know this, however: Stephen Harper is a desperate man and desperate people don't make good prime ministers.
 

Thursday, October 09, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 33

Another day, more bad news for Steve: Afghan mission will top $18B by 2011: report. You can see the video of the press conference here followed by Kevin Page answering questions about the scope of the report and the problems he encountered as his team tried to compile the relevant information (damn near impossible thanks to shoddy departmental accounting practices).

The bottom line is that this was a war run on the fly despite the fact that these departments could have used 'best practices' accounting from other countries and the revelation that it will end up costing twice as much - or more - than Harper predicted is bound to have at least some Canadians deciding that they simply can't trust that guy anymore.

Page also noted, of course, that these problems occurred under both Conservative and Liberal governments since the Afghanistan war began and Steve made sure to emphasize that point when he was questioned by the press today but the buck for what's happened since the Liberals were in power stops with him. After all, this is the party that sold its way into the last election by promising accountability and transparency - both of which Page found extremely lacking. No surprise there. Steve and the Cons have been anything but open and transparent in too many areas.

Meanwhile, back at the US military ranch, Gates has not only been out globally panhandling for more money for the Afghanistan war from whoever might have any (in this economy? who's he kidding?), he's also now begging for non-NATO countries to send troops. No matter who wins the upcoming US election, a surge similar to that in Iraq is definitely on the table. Both Obama and McCain support that strategy and plan to divert US troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to attempt to recreate what they (haven't really) pulled off in Iraq. Read my lips: the war in Afghanistan cannot be won militarily. Just how many more years do we have to stick around there until somebody in charge figures that out? So why are we still paying for what has been an incredible failure until 2011?

$18 billion...$20 billion...who really wins? Not "peace in our time" since that's not going to happen. No, the winner is - just as it's been in every US presidential and vice-presidential debate - the military-industrial complex. Corporate America. Corporate Canada. All of those huge companies that it's unpatriotic to complain about. Does anyone really believe that the number one concern of conservatives in the US or Canada is health care (as Steve was trying to convince Canadians on Thursday)? Not a chance. Throw a little money at it here and there but spend, spend, spend on war like there's no tomorrow while they fearmonger that there won't be a tomorrow unless you let them "protect our interests overseas". Right. Well, the majority aren't buying that anymore but apparently we're still buying military equipment.

Related:

U.S. Study Is Said to Warn of Crisis in Afghanistan
Petraeus: US Should Talk With Talk With Taliban, Other Enemies
US, Pakistan Torn Apart Over Terror

PS: Have I mentioned what an absolute asshole Stephen Harper is? He's using the same failing tactics as McCain and his lady pitbull: when you can't handle talking about the issues, use some nasty distraction to try to impeach your opponent's character. Let's just ship Steve to the US and be done with it.

Update: I see even Don Martin writing for the National Post is pounding Harper, Duffy and CTV for their incredibly bad judgment.

In the end the incident they hoped to use to define Mr. Dion as a confused ditherer may actually provide more telling insight into the character of Stephen Harper.

Oh we're well aware of Steve's character, Mr Martin. That's one thing he hasn't been able to hide from the Canadian public.
 

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 32

Stephen Harper is confused. Following a quick little speech on Wednesday in BC, the press gave him more than one opportunity to explain the comments he made about the bargains to be had in the stock market in the midst of this crash. His response?

Harper defended his comments, saying it was obvious to anyone who saw the interview that he was "specifically talking about the fact that many Canadians have seen big losses in their portfolios in the last couple of weeks."

"I know that because, as I say, my mother is one of those people, and I hear about it every single day. And we know that people are worried ,and they have a right to be worried about what's going on in financial markets," Harper said in a campaign appearance in Victoria.

He then repeated it wasn't appropriate for a prime minister to "join in a wave of stock market panic and pessimism around the world," but rather to ensure the government prepares in advance and make long-term investments to protect Canadians' interests.

"We had a plan," he said. "We do not get caught up in market panic."

See, here's the deal, Steve. If you don't want people to panic, you tell them not to panic. You don't tell them, with a wink and a nudge, that now's the time to buy low so you can sell high later. First of all, that does absolutely nothing for seniors like your mother who don't have much later left and who can't afford to wait for the economic sun to start shining again (not to mention that it's doubly insulting to seniors who lost out because of the Cons' income trust flip flop).

Secondly, you are not the Prime Stockbroker. You are (for now, anyway) the Prime Minister. And, as one reporter pointed out during the Q&A period in BC, you are not the chair of the Bank of Canada. It's not your job to hint about possible rate cuts any more than it is your job to offer investment advice.

Who would vote for this guy considering that he doesn't even know what his job description entails?

Here in Alberta:

Alberta's Progressive Conservative premier wants to meet with his provincial counterparts to discuss the state of the Canadian economy, even though Stephen Harper called the same proposal by Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion "panicking."

This is how this is all rolling out: anything not proposed by Steve and his federal Cons is "panicking". Maybe he shouldn't send Flaherty to the G7 meeting in Washington on Friday. Surely that's "panicking" as well?

What's ironic about this stance is that Steve is fearmongering by claiming everyone else is panicking and that is causing more panic because, at the same time, the Cons aren't providing anything resembling a long-term, stable vision that makes sense. Instead, their platform is a piecemeal offering that isn't cohesive. There is no grand picture besides stay the course.

And, speaking of Flaherty, he disclosed on Wednesday that his department had warned "a couple" of Canadian banks last year "that their capitalization levels were on the brink of falling below accepted standards". He wouldn't reveal which banks were on the receving end though and we have no way of finding out so how can we even know 1) if that's true or 2) what happened?

Meanwhile, no word so far from Flaherty on the settlement reached between RBC Capital and the SEC.

RBC Capital Markets, the investment banking arm of Royal Bank of Canada, also neither admitted or denied wrongdoing. It said the buyback would cut into its fourth-quarter earnings by about $30 million on a pretax basis. That estimated loss includes the $9.8 million civil penalty the company agreed to pay to Cuomo's office and the North American Securities Administrators Association, which represents securities regulators in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The SEC, Cuomo's office and other state regulators have been conducting a wide-ranging investigation into banks' marketing of auction-rate securities. The regulators have alleged that the banks misled customers into believing auction-rate securities were safe, cash-like investments.

If you listen to Steve tell it though, Canadian banks are squeaky clean with basically no problems and that's the problem with people being lulled into a very false sense of security by all of this stay the course talk the Cons are trying to sell. We're not panicking. We just want the truth along with assurances that the next PM actually understand what his job is - and we certainly aren't getting that from Harper.
 

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 31


Let's play "Spot the Contradiction".

Steve, on Monday:

"Our position in Canada, of course, is that we don't have a crisis in our financial sector, in our banking sector," he said, ahead of a meeting of G7 finance ministers in Washington on Friday.

Steve, on Tuesday:

TORONTO (Reuters) - Prime Minister Stephen Harper, acknowledging that Canadian banks were facing a credit crunch, said on Tuesday the government would probably take some steps soon to alleviate those.


And, what's this? Sales of Canada Savings Bonds put on hold amid market confusion

Federal officials would give no reason Tuesday for the delay, which presumably relates to the difficulty of setting interest rates under current conditions.

The bonds, a Canadian tradition since 1946, are backed by the government and promoted as a foolproof way for small investors to save. They are put on sale each fall.

David Gamble, public affairs director of the Department of Finance, which is responsible for CSBs, confirmed that the 2008 campaign has been delayed but would not say why.

The left hand obviously doesn't know what the right hand is doing because Flaherty came out later and said the bonds "should" be on sale on Wednesday. (And Canadians trust this guy and his master to take care of our money?)

And what about this? TSX closes 400 points lower amid official efforts to avoid disaster

Not to worry though, Steve's seeing the silver Tory Blue capitalist lining:

TORONTO (Reuters) - Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Tuesday he is concerned about the sharp falls in Canadian stock markets but said there may be some good stock bargains out there now.

He told a news conference that it is clear that a lot of investors have panicked, and he said members of his extended family have been shocked by developments in the market.

But he added: "I think there's probably some great buying opportunities emerging in the stock market as the consequence of all this panic."

Good to know but who the hell has money to buy any stocks? And who are these mysterious members of his extended family? Maybe somebody should track them down and interview them - unless Harper has them cloistered in a monastery somewhere for the duration of the election. Wouldn't want them to be attacked by that nasty Press virus.

Remember last week when Steve attacked Stephane because he presented a new 30 day economic platform in the middle of his campaign? It seems pretty handy that the Cons released their platform on Tuesday so they could take advantage of the timing to shift their economic policies and promises in response to the global meltdown. But Steve is busy pretending that he's just stayin' the course, you betcha (as Sarah Palin would put it).

Gilles Duceppe is right:

Stephen Harper is a "fragile" and shaky leader who is incapable of making decisions that will protect the economy, says Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe.

And what's with all of this boat talk?

Duceppe said the Tory proposals would do little to help people in the battered manufacturing and forestry sectors, especially older workers.

"I think he's just missing the boat. He talked about Noah's boat. They're still looking for it nowadays."

Duceppe was referring to Harper's comment in Toronto earlier in the day when he said now is not the time for Canadians to eschew his party.

"As the saying goes, it wasn't raining when Noah built the ark," Harper said. "Which is why when the rain came, Noah didn't need to panic and he didn't switch boats."

Which, of course, reminded me of this:


 
Somebody needs to ask Steve if he knows what a cubit is because, if he wins, he'll obviously be busy doing one massive construction project.

But wait, did he include funding for that in his new platform? Whoops.

And do we have to call him Noah now?
 

Monday, October 06, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 30

One week to go and one more sleep until the Cons release their platform. It's like Xmas Eve except, this year, Santa's wearing a sweater vest and visions of sugraplums deficits are dancing in the kiddies' heads...and Santa's.

So, what is Santa Steve planning to do about the economic problems? Why do I get the feeling that either:

1) he knows and doesn't want to tell anybody

or

2) he has absolutely no idea because Bush/Paulson have been too busy to advise him.

Maybe I'm not sure because of news like this:

Earlier Monday, Harper said the government is considering "secondary" plans to stabilize the Canadian financial system. But within hours, his chief spokesman said the government wasn't planning any extraordinary measures.

Does that mean that if our economy starts dying, Steve will issue a do not resuscitate order? (Or will he page Bill Frist for a second opinion first?)

And, shouldn't we be a tad concerned that Steve's now channeling McCain and calling people "my friends" in his speeches? I'd say so.

In related news, the TSX dropped more than 1200 points and ended the day at -572 points on Monday while Harper played hide and seek with his party's policy. We're going to need more than some Santa dropping off gifts one nite of the year to fix the upcoming economic mess. A bespectacled, soft-bellied, invisible, jolly guy (who doesn't like to talk to the press) just won't cut it - and the latest polls show the Cons' support slipping. Andrew Coyne has the handy, colour-coded trend charts. It looks like there won't be a majority under Steve's tree Xmas morning.

Okay, enough of that metaphor...

The CBC has the opposition leaders' reactions to Steve's no man/country is an island day. (And can I just add that several countries actually are islands? Steve's geography grade - F)

Moving on, The Star has a great pic of the CAW "putting the boots to Flaherty" on Monday. More civil disobedience, more often!

Don Martin has a roundup of 10 incumbent MP seats that are "in deep doo doo". (Yes, he really did use those words in his headline. The story is in the National Post after all and you have to write for the intellectual capacity of your audience.)

Frankly, I think Canadians are tired of the bickering and worried about their economic futures - TD announced rate increases on Monday and the loonie and oil prices are dropping. Even if Dion hasn't sold his party's Green Shift plan, we do have a collective memory of the fact that Cons usually bring deficits at the federal level and Libs dig their way out of the mess they leave. We're not quite at that point but that may have an effect on your average voter's psyche if he or she isn't really paying attention beyond the gloom and doom economic headlines each day. And if voters are uncomfortable about the Liberals' "shift", they also have the NDP to choose from - which may explain the growing support for that party's platform. The Cons' little dribbles of inconsequential financial aid to Joe and Jane Canuck may not be enough to sustain that party's fortunes, such as they are, but leading a minority government is better than leading the opposition. And the Cons don't want to end up back in that position.

We'll see what kind of crap promises they fork over on Tuesday when they release their so-called platform full of promises they're sure to break anyway.

Related:

Why Stephen Harper is unfit to govern. (What he knew about this crisis and when he knew it.)
 
 

Write Your Own Caption

 

"I saw his nose. It growed this big!"


Photo credit: CP

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 29

I'm taking the nite off. In the meantime, enjoy Air Farce's take on the economic meltdown.


And, from the irony file: Bank heist accused is investment firm VP
 

Saturday, October 04, 2008

Canadian Election Watch - Day 28

Day 28 and no candidates from any of the parties have shown up at my door yet. The only flier in the mailbox so far was left by Conservative Deepak Obhrai's campaign. He'll win, no doubt, but can the other party candidates at least pretend that they're running against him? Can they at least try to be a bit more enthusiastic than my pathetic fellow Albertan voters?

Alrighty then. Getting on with it...

Steve, on Saturday:

The campaign is still "fluid," said Harper, although he declined to say why he believed that is so, whether economic developments have caused a volatility. He would say only it is because of the way "some of other parties are conducting their campaigns."

Nailing Jello™ - to the wall - again.

Harper admitted he had learned lessons from the 2004 and 2006 campaign, but wouldn't go into detail.

"Look, the biggest myth about '06 was that we did everything right, because we won, right. But we did some things wrong, but on that one, if you guys didn't figure them out, I'm not going to share them with you."

He said that "all wisdom" will emerge after it's over, but cautioned that myths based on factual inaccuracies about those campaigns have also "become entrenched."

"all wisdom"...I can't wait! (Is he forecasting Armageddon there or am I just being paranoid? Not to worry since I'll be Left Behind anyway and could use a car since I don't have one..."all wisdom"...how exciting...vote for Steve, The Oracle.)

Oh and apparently, according to Steve, Elizabeth May has had a sex change operation:

He said there will be lots he'll miss about politics. "I'll miss all of you, just as I've missed you this week," he said about the week where the debates interrupted the constant campaign tour. "Although I must say I enjoyed having those four guys yell at me this week."

I won't miss you one bit, Steve, so don't lose any sleep over that.

Moving right along, a fourth NDP candidate, Andrew McKeever, bites the dust. What a gem he was:

The Durham, Ont., candidate posted comments on Facebook calling one war activist a "fascist bitch" and threatening to beat up another person.
[...]
McKeever wrote comments peppered with expletives and calling the operators of a war-resister website "Nazis."
[...]
"I like the part in Schindler's List when the guard starts waxing the prisoners," he wrote.

Yet, when his writings were exposed last week, Layton kept him on. Why, exactly?

Stephane, Stephane, Stephane...

MISCOUCHE, P.E.I. — Stephane Dion is portraying Jack Layton as a far-left socialist as some polls show the NDP leader is on the verge of overtaking Mr. Dion's Liberals.

You're looking desperate...

Are we there yet?