Stephen Harper in studio

  1. Harper just lied twice in one sentence. He said on air that his criminal justice legislation has been stalled by the "Opposition Coalition" — ignoring the fact that his bills died on the order papers when he called a snap election in 2008 and twice shuttered the House.

    The second bit of the lie is that he used to claim it was a Liberal dominated Senate (not the House) that was blocking his crime legislation.

    This guy has been lying so often for so long, he can't keep them straight.

  2. Harper just lied twice in one sentence. He said on air that his criminal justice legislation has been stalled by the "Opposition Coalition" — ignoring the fact that his bills died on the order papers when he called a snap election in 2008 and twice shuttered the House.

    The second bit of the lie is that he used to claim it was a Liberal dominated Senate (not the House) that was blocking his crime legislation.

    This guy has been lying so often for so long, he can't keep them straight.

    • I agree one hundred percent with 'Amateur Hour'. Harper can not even stop himself from lying.

    • “It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

      • Got a link for that? Thanks.

  3. Couldn't Harper just be mistaken? Why is it when a politician says something that the opposition disagrees with that the politician is lying? Lying to me is when you ask a question that could have a yes or no answer and you get one that is patently untrue. That is a lie. When you ask somebody to recite some history and they mis-speak I don't call that a lie but a mistake.

    Let's get some perspective here.

  4. Couldn't Harper just be mistaken? Why is it when a politician says something that the opposition disagrees with that the politician is lying? Lying to me is when you ask a question that could have a yes or no answer and you get one that is patently untrue. That is a lie. When you ask somebody to recite some history and they mis-speak I don't call that a lie but a mistake.

    Let's get some perspective here.

  5. i am sorry the canadian "reality show" has dropped to such a low level.

    canada is the only country in the g-6/8 who has not suffered a major recession in the past few years. surely, this is not because of our very low labour rates????, nor great efficiency in manufacturing?????.

    without p.m. harper somehow getting us through this most worldwide and stressful time, i wonder where we think we would be??

    we should be applauding him!!!

    truly, i believe he deserves a country who appreciates a difficult job, WELL DONE.

    my thought for the day

    joan bates appleyard

  6. i am sorry the canadian "reality show" has dropped to such a low level.

    canada is the only country in the g-6/8 who has not suffered a major recession in the past few years. surely, this is not because of our very low labour rates????, nor great efficiency in manufacturing?????.

    without p.m. harper somehow getting us through this most worldwide and stressful time, i wonder where we think we would be??

    we should be applauding him!!!

    truly, i believe he deserves a country who appreciates a difficult job, WELL DONE.

    my thought for the day

    joan bates appleyard

    • One of the reasons Canada is doing as well as it is, is because of our banks and policies of the previous Liberal government. – in particular Paul Martin's hammer on the deficit at that time. Remember what a mess we were in? Despite their transgressions in Quebec, the Liberals got a handle on the debt and left Canada with a surplus!! The deficit we are in now under Harper is the worst it has ever been! Much of the spending was unnecessary and the promises he is making now won't come in until the deficit is paid off!!! 2015 is a pipe-dream.

      • Harper had us in deficiet BEFORE the great recession. How is it people forget that? and just for good measure… here ya go again…“It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

      • Once again, another Liberal leaner going on about how wonderful Martin was. I think the Unemployment insurance monies he took and paid the deficit down with is no different from stealing from the contributors. He was no hero, he was a crook!

        • EI is funded by workers. There is no need to stash the cash. It should be used to pay down debt.

      • If you remember, the Liberals had a majority. they didn't have to barter and trade to get every bill through. I think you are proving Harper's point about Canada needing a majority.
        As far as Martin and his fiscal brilliance, 'inmyopionion' has a better memory than you. It was EI funds that they used, and that showed how much integrity they had. Also, people have to stop thinking that the gov't of the day is who is to blame/congratulate for current situations. It is an amalgamation of many decisions, and many gov't's before that gets us to where we are. The big question we need to ask is who is better suited to financially get us to where we need to be. Ignatieff, with his 'promise a day' campaign, has shown that he has no fiscal acumen, and has no problem spending his way into 24Ssussex, of course itis our money. Oh, how caring Ignatieff is, to lavish money on us (our money – debt money) in order to show how good of a leader he will be. If he truly cared about Canada, he would propose plans that don't end up with our kids paying them back.

        • Harper gave us our 56 billion deficit. The biggest in Canadian history. He lavished us as you say.

  7. As a woman I like Harper's performance and demeanor, the last being constantly criticized as wooden. I want to see a Prime Minister who is thoughtful and serious and not a constant smiler, joker and gladhander. I like his dignity. Some people love to perform, be the focus of all eyes and grandstand. Harper is not one of them, and I approve. After all, during this campaign, he still has the duties of Prime Minister and the miriad problems and issues that he must deal with on behalf of Canada, while the other leaders just need to campaign and perform for an audience.

  8. As a woman I like Harper's performance and demeanor, the last being constantly criticized as wooden. I want to see a Prime Minister who is thoughtful and serious and not a constant smiler, joker and gladhander. I like his dignity. Some people love to perform, be the focus of all eyes and grandstand. Harper is not one of them, and I approve. After all, during this campaign, he still has the duties of Prime Minister and the miriad problems and issues that he must deal with on behalf of Canada, while the other leaders just need to campaign and perform for an audience.

    • Seriously?? I mean seriously? Harper has no trouble perfroming from a podium and at a certain distance from the hoi polloi. And he's been campaigning for months.

    • As a woman what do you think of this? harpers attack on Women.
      This is, after all, the same government that killed plans for national childcare, drastically cut funding to Status of Women and ended the court challenges program that sought to help women and minorities fight for their rights. News recently leaked of a secretive, parliamentary anti-abortion caucus, touted by its chair Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge, as opening a "new era" of advocacy for the unborn.

      And just in case the Harper government's war on women wasn't obvious enough, a reminder that this is the group who removed the word "equality" from the Status of Women mandate.

      • How come it is so obvious and you are the only one who 'sees' it. Attacks on women – get serious. You liberals might as well start saying he hates humans and wants all humans to die. It would make as much sense as the rest of the stuff I have been hearing.
        "killed plans for national childcare' – not true – Harper added a program that gives parents $100/m.
        'drastically cut . . SoW' – your definition of drastic and mine might be different, but I never heard this in the news, probably not true. If it were, it might be a bloated department that needed trimming. (they probably all are) that is not evidence of anything.
        'ended court . . rights.' – never heard of it, but again, it might have needed to be cut, and might have been redundant. (and why should women or minorities have special programs available, paid by gov't, that aren't available to all?)
        'News recently…secretive… unborn'. Here it comes, folks – the secret agenda. No proof, just 'secret leaks'. give us a break.
        'and just in . . .mandate.' – again, never heard of it. just checked the website, and saw the word 'equality' all over it. What are you trying to pull with this comment? what on earth is the 'status of women' mandate anyway? are taxpayers getting good value on whatever it is? How much does it cost us?
        There are lots of gov't departments and services. Changes to any of them does not prove anything, other than they might ave need to be changed. Also, we are in a deficit, so I, for one, would like gov't spending to go down.

        • You liberals might as well start saying he hates humans and wants all humans to die.
          Well actually your not far off with this statement. The conservative movement across the planet would like nothing better than to have some 5 or 6 billion humans gone. We are cutting into their natural resources (oil for the most part) and we are seen as nothing more than lice. Elect Harper and help speed up the process.

          • I am trying to not be mean, but that is a really silly statement. Last I checked, it was the liberally minded greens who were self sterilizing so as to protect the environment, and natural resources.
            I really enjoy debating people who have opinions that are diametrically opposed to mine, as long as they like sticking to facts. Your statements truly make me think that your concept of reality might be a little off. I hope you realize that you aren't helping your 'cause' at all. Some people will think that all liberals share your opinions, which obviously isn't true.

          • Anyone that assumes that all liberals think alike does not know what it is to be liberal. A 'liberal' is a free thinker, does not necessarily go with the pack and follows his/her own compass. "liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets"

            Conservatism: People in this category will tend to have strong opinions about enforcing the moral order (religious conformance, strict family values, lesser freedom of expression, stricter laws…) and about favoring individual initiatives (lower taxes, less corporate and environmental regulations, …).

          • Here's a bit of information for you.
            One long-standing project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The corn has been field tested in tests financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants, announced, “We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies". You can read the rest at the following link. http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/v
            It is not me that has a 'consept of reality that is a little off'. I am not a sheep. More people should tune into what is really going on around them.

          • First of all, people have taken to using 'classical liberal' and 'classical conservative', because the terms have become pretty skewed over time. On these posts, most people tend to use conservative and liberal to mean the respective parties. In that regard, I would stress that liberal is in no way a believer in smaller government, or less government intervention. While liberal do attest to the belief in the liberty of individuals, they generally try to have gov't enforce it. This actually takes away from individual liberty, as once it becomes about groups, and some groups disagree, the gov't ends up taking sides.
            I checked out your link, and to be quite blunt, you lost me at 'Illuminati'. Sorry, but I don't buy into that bunk. My father has been spewing it for years, and it is flatly unbelievable. I am not a sheep, and I can't be mislead by some conspiracy theorists.

    • You have the right to your opinion, of course, as does everyone. But why did you preface yours with "as a woman"?

      • Because thats how you started your comment, 'as a woman' so I'm asking your opinion 'as a women' on what I see as attacks on women by the Harper government. I didn't mean anything by it I was just asking how you see it. Maybe you don't see it the way I do, that's all. Did not mean to offend and if I did, I oppologize.

        • Sorry, did I miss where I was replying? I wasn't replying to you, because I got that's why you started with "as a woman." I was asking Syl why she felt the need to preface her opinion as that of a woman. It seems to me she was either a) trying to infer that this is how "women" think (Diane, Holly, Emily and I would disagree, to name a few) or b) allowing for a discount of the opinion, since it was only the opinion of a mere woman. I honestly can't think of another reason to do so.

          I guess I'm hoping it was a) even though that's underhanded, misleading, and a bit of a joke. But its better than b).

          • How is saying 'as a woman/man/brother/sister/uncle/aunt…etc' anything more than to give the reader a little perspective about the author? She never said 'I am a woman and this is how all women think'. You are more than able to post, 'as a women' to counter what she thinks. You give only two options, both bad, and 'hope' that she was doing it for the less 'bad' reason. Not too fair.

            People who read one comment are not silly enough to lump like people together. If I did that, after reading all the Maclean's comments, I wouldn't have a high opinion of anyone in Canada. There are some crazy's out there, in every group.

          • As I said, I honestly couldn't think of another reason to do so. Why do we need her perspective "as a woman"? What is different about a woman's perspective that is so different from, say just as an example, a citizen's perspective, which I think is assumed when talking about voting in Canada. Unless you said, "as an American/Australian/Brazilian/Bahrainian" or something like that. Then, your special perspective would be relevant to disclose. Women do make up more than half of the population, you know.

          • No one said that we 'needed her perspective "as a woman"', just that your opinion of why she gave it was unfair.
            There has been a lot of press about Harper being wooden, and not appealing to female voters, so maybe that is why she stated it. Either way, I don't think your two guesses are accurate, and again, are unfair.
            We are not a bunch of asexual human pods. Our ethnicity, religion, sex, upbringing and many other things affect our thinking. If I wanted everyone to know what I thought as a rich, white, woman, or as a poor, black man, this is relevant information for me to divulge, and useful for people to hear.

            As far as women making up more than half the population, I am not even sure why you put that in your comment. It has no relevance to what we were discussing. I would guess, but will probably be slammed for it, that you are pretty sensitive about women's issues. That is probably why you were trying to make more of Sly's comments than was actually there. She just stated how she felt as a women, and you tried to belittle her. She has every right to state her opinions, while you have every right to counter them with valid facts. Resorting to anything else is just petty.

          • Actually, I'm sensitive about the fact that you consider certain issues "women's issues." As if you aren't a parent or a child, or aren't against spousal abuse, bullying, etc. Just because you might have a woman in your life who tends to take care of certain things, doesn't mean they aren't issues you (ought to) care about. Because maybe you don't have a woman in your life who tends to take care of these certain things. Just as a fairly good example right now, Ignatieff didn't have a "woman" taking care of his mother for him–although he did have a father and brother.

            But I'm not particularly sensitive about these issues myself. I totally agree with you, though, that our ethnicity, religion, sex, upbringing etc. affects our thinking. I just don't think her sex, in this particular discussion, was relevant at all. Nor would it be relvant if she chose any one of the other parties for her vote.

          • As far as me considering certain issues 'woman's issues', it isn't a belief, it is a fact. There are issues that directly affect women, just like there are issues that directly affect truck drivers, or sky divers, or homosexuals, or conjoined twins, or any other identifiable group. It doesn't mean that they are less than anyone else, just that they belong to that certain identifiable group. To say otherwise is balderdash. How you jumped to the conclusion that I don't care about 'women's issues' is beyond me. That someone chooses to start a comment with 'I am a man' or 'I am a woman' is a non-issue. You were the one who had an issue with it.
            I also notice that you have disregarded anything that I have said in regards to Sly – that is telling.

          • A women may have a different perspective on certain things that will affect them directly. It is important to respect that.

          • Yes, that is true. However, we are not a minority (except in places like the House of Commons) and shouldn't be marginalized OR given special status because of our (not-so-unique) woman's perspective. If we'd been talking about sexual abuse sentences and she'd said, "as a victim of sexual assault" or something like that (even "as a mother" when talking about day-care, tuition fees or anything pertaining to kids) that would be relevant. But she was just talking about which leader and political party she's going to vote for. Lots of women will vote for Conservatives. But not all of us. Same as lots of men will vote for, say, the NDP. It isn't "as a man" you chose that party, but perhaps other aspects of your life. Well, same with her. That's all I'm saying.

  9. I WONDER EVERYTIME I SEE THE LATEST POLLS WHEN THE CITIZENS OF CANADA ARE GOING TO WAKE UP. DO THEY NOT READ THE PAPERS AND MAGAZINES, LISTEN TO THE NEWS AND THE SPEACHES? DON’T THEY EVEN CARE THAT THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT UNDER HARPER IS IN CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT. THEY LIED. IS THIS THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT THE PEOPLE WANT? I DONT THINK SO. IT IS NOT THE HARPER GOVERNMENT IT IS THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT. OUR WONDERFUL COUNTRY IS SUPPORTING PEOPLE OF OTHER COUNTRIES, OUR BRAVE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE DYING IN SUPPORT OF OTHERS WHO WANT TO HAVE WHAT WE HAVE. A COUNTRY WHERE WE ARE FREE TO SPEAK OUR MINDS AND EXPECT OUR GOVERNMENT TO BE OPEN AND HONEST WITH US AT ALL TIMES. CANADIANS , LISTEN, THINK, BE AWARE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING AND THEN GET OUT AND VOTE. WE CANT GO ON AS WE HAVE WITH A DICTATORSHIP. THE ATTACK ADS ARE WAY OUT OF LINE — CHILDISH, IGNORANT, INSULTING AND JUST WRONG. MR. IGNATIEFF AND THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE CANADIAN CITIZENS DESERVE BETTER.

  10. I WONDER EVERYTIME I SEE THE LATEST POLLS WHEN THE CITIZENS OF CANADA ARE GOING TO WAKE UP. DO THEY NOT READ THE PAPERS AND MAGAZINES, LISTEN TO THE NEWS AND THE SPEACHES? DON’T THEY EVEN CARE THAT THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT UNDER HARPER IS IN CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT. THEY LIED. IS THIS THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT THE PEOPLE WANT? I DONT THINK SO. IT IS NOT THE HARPER GOVERNMENT IT IS THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT. OUR WONDERFUL COUNTRY IS SUPPORTING PEOPLE OF OTHER COUNTRIES, OUR BRAVE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE DYING IN SUPPORT OF OTHERS WHO WANT TO HAVE WHAT WE HAVE. A COUNTRY WHERE WE ARE FREE TO SPEAK OUR MINDS AND EXPECT OUR GOVERNMENT TO BE OPEN AND HONEST WITH US AT ALL TIMES. CANADIANS , LISTEN, THINK, BE AWARE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING AND THEN GET OUT AND VOTE. WE CANT GO ON AS WE HAVE WITH A DICTATORSHIP. THE ATTACK ADS ARE WAY OUT OF LINE — CHILDISH, IGNORANT, INSULTING AND JUST WRONG. MR. IGNATIEFF AND THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE CANADIAN CITIZENS DESERVE BETTER.

    • Nanos is a tory run poll, CTV or Conservative Television. It is in their best interest to tell Canadians harper is leading in the polls. Don't believe them! Vote Liberal!!!

  11. Hey, where's the article on CBC's Vote Compass–why can't I find it?

  12. Hey, where's the article on CBC's Vote Compass–why can't I find it?

  13. Small hint: if you want your comments to be read and taken seriously, don't type only in capitals.

  14. I guess the punch-line for this one is: Are his lips moving?

  15. One of the reasons Canada is doing as well as it is, is because of our banks and policies of the previous Liberal government. – in particular Paul Martin's hammer on the deficit at that time. Remember what a mess we were in? Despite their transgressions in Quebec, the Liberals got a handle on the debt and left Canada with a surplus!! The deficit we are in now under Harper is the worst it has ever been! Much of the spending was unnecessary and the promises he is making now won't come in until the deficit is paid off!!! 2015 is a pipe-dream.

  16. I guess the punch-line for this one is: Are his lips moving?

  17. Softball interview.

  18. Softball interview.

    • very true

    • Every day. Jeff Allan likes to think he's Rush Limbaugh, I think.

  19. I agree one hundred percent with 'Amateur Hour'. Harper can not even stop himself from lying.

  20. Seriously?? I mean seriously? Harper has no trouble perfroming from a podium and at a certain distance from the hoi polloi. And he's been campaigning for months.

  21. “It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

  22. Harper had us in deficiet BEFORE the great recession. How is it people forget that? and just for good measure… here ya go again…“It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

  23. As a woman what do you think of this? harpers attack on Women.
    This is, after all, the same government that killed plans for national childcare, drastically cut funding to Status of Women and ended the court challenges program that sought to help women and minorities fight for their rights. News recently leaked of a secretive, parliamentary anti-abortion caucus, touted by its chair Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge, as opening a "new era" of advocacy for the unborn.

    And just in case the Harper government's war on women wasn't obvious enough, a reminder that this is the group who removed the word "equality" from the Status of Women mandate.

  24. Nanos is a tory run poll, CTV or Conservative Television. It is in their best interest to tell Canadians harper is leading in the polls. Don't believe them! Vote Liberal!!!

  25. Smart Canadians have very little choice ,We must keep Mr. Harper in power or this whole country will drown in its own crying towel. He are still in a recession and we need this government to keep moving forward. We live in the best country in the world, Just take a monment and think about that and please vote.

    • If we keep Harper in power we will lose our freedom and human rights. He has to go. Don't forget Harper got us into the mess we are in and dosen't have a clue how to get us out. I'll go for liberal surpluses anyday and just a reminder of the real Harper…I do agree with your please vote though, vote Liberal and save Canada!!!
      …“It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

  26. Smart Canadians have very little choice ,We must keep Mr. Harper in power or this whole country will drown in its own crying towel. He are still in a recession and we need this government to keep moving forward. We live in the best country in the world, Just take a monment and think about that and please vote.

  27. If we keep Harper in power we will lose our freedom and human rights. He has to go. Don't forget Harper got us into the mess we are in and dosen't have a clue how to get us out. I'll go for liberal surpluses anyday and just a reminder of the real Harper…I do agree with your please vote though, vote Liberal and save Canada!!!
    …“It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act.” (Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997)

  28. I will vote for the Conservative because truth be told it does not matter who you vote for it always seem to be the same ending. I think we have to let the current regime continue and see what a long term effect will be. We keep pissing on ourselves by changing the leadership just because they have a better flavor. I want to see tax breaks for the middle income earners who are single and just scraping by. They have no other deductions, because he or she is trying to hold on to what they currently own. So in short if we truly want change then you have to get off your ASS go to protests or voice your opinion LOUDLY. Just remember this if cuts and savings is what you are after then you won't be able to eat the cake to. Think about this Canada.

    • I'll take freedom anyday. Vote liberal!!!

    • Well, thanks for explaining how someone can vote for exactly what he doesn't want, without twigging to the fact that he is voting for exactly what he doesn't want.

  29. I will vote for the Conservative because truth be told it does not matter who you vote for it always seem to be the same ending. I think we have to let the current regime continue and see what a long term effect will be. We keep pissing on ourselves by changing the leadership just because they have a better flavor. I want to see tax breaks for the middle income earners who are single and just scraping by. They have no other deductions, because he or she is trying to hold on to what they currently own. So in short if we truly want change then you have to get off your ASS go to protests or voice your opinion LOUDLY. Just remember this if cuts and savings is what you are after then you won't be able to eat the cake to. Think about this Canada.

  30. I'll take freedom anyday. Vote liberal!!!

  31. Once again, another Liberal leaner going on about how wonderful Martin was. I think the Unemployment insurance monies he took and paid the deficit down with is no different from stealing from the contributors. He was no hero, he was a crook!

  32. very true

  33. How come it is so obvious and you are the only one who 'sees' it. Attacks on women – get serious. You liberals might as well start saying he hates humans and wants all humans to die. It would make as much sense as the rest of the stuff I have been hearing.
    "killed plans for national childcare' – not true – Harper added a program that gives parents $100/m.
    'drastically cut . . SoW' – your definition of drastic and mine might be different, but I never heard this in the news, probably not true. If it were, it might be a bloated department that needed trimming. (they probably all are) that is not evidence of anything.
    'ended court . . rights.' – never heard of it, but again, it might have needed to be cut, and might have been redundant. (and why should women or minorities have special programs available, paid by gov't, that aren't available to all?)
    'News recently…secretive… unborn'. Here it comes, folks – the secret agenda. No proof, just 'secret leaks'. give us a break.
    'and just in . . .mandate.' – again, never heard of it. just checked the website, and saw the word 'equality' all over it. What are you trying to pull with this comment? what on earth is the 'status of women' mandate anyway? are taxpayers getting good value on whatever it is? How much does it cost us?
    There are lots of gov't departments and services. Changes to any of them does not prove anything, other than they might ave need to be changed. Also, we are in a deficit, so I, for one, would like gov't spending to go down.

  34. If you remember, the Liberals had a majority. they didn't have to barter and trade to get every bill through. I think you are proving Harper's point about Canada needing a majority.
    As far as Martin and his fiscal brilliance, 'inmyopionion' has a better memory than you. It was EI funds that they used, and that showed how much integrity they had. Also, people have to stop thinking that the gov't of the day is who is to blame/congratulate for current situations. It is an amalgamation of many decisions, and many gov't's before that gets us to where we are. The big question we need to ask is who is better suited to financially get us to where we need to be. Ignatieff, with his 'promise a day' campaign, has shown that he has no fiscal acumen, and has no problem spending his way into 24Ssussex, of course itis our money. Oh, how caring Ignatieff is, to lavish money on us (our money – debt money) in order to show how good of a leader he will be. If he truly cared about Canada, he would propose plans that don't end up with our kids paying them back.

  35. I'm going to vote for Harper again. He's doing a great job in my books. He'll have my support come election day. The liberals and NDP seem to want to start spending like drunken pirates. Stay the course Stephen. The majority is not far off.

  36. I'm going to vote for Harper again. He's doing a great job in my books. He'll have my support come election day. The liberals and NDP seem to want to start spending like drunken pirates. Stay the course Stephen. The majority is not far off.

  37. An excellent interview by Jeff….professional! Consistent truth from PM Harper. I hope that Canadians can finally give this government what it needs to get the job done, a solid majority, a $300 million venture caused by the Liberal Party, is this good money management.

    This money would be better spent in hospitals!

  38. An excellent interview by Jeff….professional! Consistent truth from PM Harper. I hope that Canadians can finally give this government what it needs to get the job done, a solid majority, a $300 million venture caused by the Liberal Party, is this good money management.

    This money would be better spent in hospitals!

  39. You liberals might as well start saying he hates humans and wants all humans to die.
    Well actually your not far off with this statement. The conservative movement across the planet would like nothing better than to have some 5 or 6 billion humans gone. We are cutting into their natural resources (oil for the most part) and we are seen as nothing more than lice. Elect Harper and help speed up the process.

  40. We got throught this recession because there are banking policies in place that they do not have in other countries. The present government had little to do with how we sailed through the recession, if you believe that. Moving forward I will not be voting for the present Conservative government not based on that but based on his performace in running the country or lack there of.

  41. We got throught this recession because there are banking policies in place that they do not have in other countries. The present government had little to do with how we sailed through the recession, if you believe that. Moving forward I will not be voting for the present Conservative government not based on that but based on his performace in running the country or lack there of.

  42. Thanks MacLeans; a very smooth delivery by someone who may even believe he is telling 'all the truth ' he really knows. .. The election appears to have been called because the NDP request for $300m for relief of constant citizen needs was rejected in favour of a $400m unnecessary election. .. A working coalition scares the PM because the combined use of those chosen by all thinking voting Canadians would be a cohesive Parliament for the people not the Party.

  43. Thanks MacLeans; a very smooth delivery by someone who may even believe he is telling 'all the truth ' he really knows. .. The election appears to have been called because the NDP request for $300m for relief of constant citizen needs was rejected in favour of a $400m unnecessary election. .. A working coalition scares the PM because the combined use of those chosen by all thinking voting Canadians would be a cohesive Parliament for the people not the Party.

  44. Currently, Harper is not the Prime Minister and has not been so since the House fell. He should only be referred to as such if during this interim, he is acting officially in that capacity This does not include campaigning! I am constantly amazed at how few of the media are aware of this or respect.it. Full marks to the CBC for usually getting it right.

    • Wrong. He's Prime Minister until he resigns. MPs are no longer MPs, but the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he loses & resigns.

      • That would be May 2nd.

  45. Currently, Harper is not the Prime Minister and has not been so since the House fell. He should only be referred to as such if during this interim, he is acting officially in that capacity This does not include campaigning! I am constantly amazed at how few of the media are aware of this or respect.it. Full marks to the CBC for usually getting it right.

  46. Harper gave us our 56 billion deficit. The biggest in Canadian history. He lavished us as you say.

  47. You have the right to your opinion, of course, as does everyone. But why did you preface yours with "as a woman"?

  48. Every day. Jeff Allan likes to think he's Rush Limbaugh, I think.

  49. I am trying to not be mean, but that is a really silly statement. Last I checked, it was the liberally minded greens who were self sterilizing so as to protect the environment, and natural resources.
    I really enjoy debating people who have opinions that are diametrically opposed to mine, as long as they like sticking to facts. Your statements truly make me think that your concept of reality might be a little off. I hope you realize that you aren't helping your 'cause' at all. Some people will think that all liberals share your opinions, which obviously isn't true.

  50. Well, thanks for explaining how someone can vote for exactly what he doesn't want, without twigging to the fact that he is voting for exactly what he doesn't want.

  51. Wrong. He's Prime Minister until he resigns. MPs are no longer MPs, but the Prime Minister remains Prime Minister until he loses & resigns.

  52. EI is funded by workers. There is no need to stash the cash. It should be used to pay down debt.

  53. Because thats how you started your comment, 'as a woman' so I'm asking your opinion 'as a women' on what I see as attacks on women by the Harper government. I didn't mean anything by it I was just asking how you see it. Maybe you don't see it the way I do, that's all. Did not mean to offend and if I did, I oppologize.

  54. That would be May 2nd.

  55. Sorry, did I miss where I was replying? I wasn't replying to you, because I got that's why you started with "as a woman." I was asking Syl why she felt the need to preface her opinion as that of a woman. It seems to me she was either a) trying to infer that this is how "women" think (Diane, Holly, Emily and I would disagree, to name a few) or b) allowing for a discount of the opinion, since it was only the opinion of a mere woman. I honestly can't think of another reason to do so.

    I guess I'm hoping it was a) even though that's underhanded, misleading, and a bit of a joke. But its better than b).

  56. Pathological liar and hypocrite.

  57. Pathological liar and hypocrite.

  58. How is saying 'as a woman/man/brother/sister/uncle/aunt…etc' anything more than to give the reader a little perspective about the author? She never said 'I am a woman and this is how all women think'. You are more than able to post, 'as a women' to counter what she thinks. You give only two options, both bad, and 'hope' that she was doing it for the less 'bad' reason. Not too fair.

    People who read one comment are not silly enough to lump like people together. If I did that, after reading all the Maclean's comments, I wouldn't have a high opinion of anyone in Canada. There are some crazy's out there, in every group.

  59. As I said, I honestly couldn't think of another reason to do so. Why do we need her perspective "as a woman"? What is different about a woman's perspective that is so different from, say just as an example, a citizen's perspective, which I think is assumed when talking about voting in Canada. Unless you said, "as an American/Australian/Brazilian/Bahrainian" or something like that. Then, your special perspective would be relevant to disclose. Women do make up more than half of the population, you know.

  60. Anyone that assumes that all liberals think alike does not know what it is to be liberal. A 'liberal' is a free thinker, does not necessarily go with the pack and follows his/her own compass. "liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets"

    Conservatism: People in this category will tend to have strong opinions about enforcing the moral order (religious conformance, strict family values, lesser freedom of expression, stricter laws…) and about favoring individual initiatives (lower taxes, less corporate and environmental regulations, …).

  61. Here's a bit of information for you.
    One long-standing project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The corn has been field tested in tests financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants, announced, “We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies". You can read the rest at the following link. http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/v
    It is not me that has a 'consept of reality that is a little off'. I am not a sheep. More people should tune into what is really going on around them.

  62. A women may have a different perspective on certain things that will affect them directly. It is important to respect that.

  63. Got a link for that? Thanks.

  64. Saturday Globe & Mail had an article regarding the fact that the crime rate in Canada has been on the decline for several years. Why is Mr. Harper building prisions? Is he planning on a 'Police State'. Also with 73% of the Canadian popluation making under 50k yr. who is he going to 'tax' to pay off the deficit – surely not big business! Don't waste your vote!

  65. Saturday Globe & Mail had an article regarding the fact that the crime rate in Canada has been on the decline for several years. Why is Mr. Harper building prisions? Is he planning on a 'Police State'. Also with 73% of the Canadian popluation making under 50k yr. who is he going to 'tax' to pay off the deficit – surely not big business! Don't waste your vote!

  66. First of all, people have taken to using 'classical liberal' and 'classical conservative', because the terms have become pretty skewed over time. On these posts, most people tend to use conservative and liberal to mean the respective parties. In that regard, I would stress that liberal is in no way a believer in smaller government, or less government intervention. While liberal do attest to the belief in the liberty of individuals, they generally try to have gov't enforce it. This actually takes away from individual liberty, as once it becomes about groups, and some groups disagree, the gov't ends up taking sides.
    I checked out your link, and to be quite blunt, you lost me at 'Illuminati'. Sorry, but I don't buy into that bunk. My father has been spewing it for years, and it is flatly unbelievable. I am not a sheep, and I can't be mislead by some conspiracy theorists.

  67. No one said that we 'needed her perspective "as a woman"', just that your opinion of why she gave it was unfair.
    There has been a lot of press about Harper being wooden, and not appealing to female voters, so maybe that is why she stated it. Either way, I don't think your two guesses are accurate, and again, are unfair.
    We are not a bunch of asexual human pods. Our ethnicity, religion, sex, upbringing and many other things affect our thinking. If I wanted everyone to know what I thought as a rich, white, woman, or as a poor, black man, this is relevant information for me to divulge, and useful for people to hear.

    As far as women making up more than half the population, I am not even sure why you put that in your comment. It has no relevance to what we were discussing. I would guess, but will probably be slammed for it, that you are pretty sensitive about women's issues. That is probably why you were trying to make more of Sly's comments than was actually there. She just stated how she felt as a women, and you tried to belittle her. She has every right to state her opinions, while you have every right to counter them with valid facts. Resorting to anything else is just petty.

  68. Yes, that is true. However, we are not a minority (except in places like the House of Commons) and shouldn't be marginalized OR given special status because of our (not-so-unique) woman's perspective. If we'd been talking about sexual abuse sentences and she'd said, "as a victim of sexual assault" or something like that (even "as a mother" when talking about day-care, tuition fees or anything pertaining to kids) that would be relevant. But she was just talking about which leader and political party she's going to vote for. Lots of women will vote for Conservatives. But not all of us. Same as lots of men will vote for, say, the NDP. It isn't "as a man" you chose that party, but perhaps other aspects of your life. Well, same with her. That's all I'm saying.

  69. Actually, I'm sensitive about the fact that you consider certain issues "women's issues." As if you aren't a parent or a child, or aren't against spousal abuse, bullying, etc. Just because you might have a woman in your life who tends to take care of certain things, doesn't mean they aren't issues you (ought to) care about. Because maybe you don't have a woman in your life who tends to take care of these certain things. Just as a fairly good example right now, Ignatieff didn't have a "woman" taking care of his mother for him–although he did have a father and brother.

    But I'm not particularly sensitive about these issues myself. I totally agree with you, though, that our ethnicity, religion, sex, upbringing etc. affects our thinking. I just don't think her sex, in this particular discussion, was relevant at all. Nor would it be relvant if she chose any one of the other parties for her vote.

  70. As far as me considering certain issues 'woman's issues', it isn't a belief, it is a fact. There are issues that directly affect women, just like there are issues that directly affect truck drivers, or sky divers, or homosexuals, or conjoined twins, or any other identifiable group. It doesn't mean that they are less than anyone else, just that they belong to that certain identifiable group. To say otherwise is balderdash. How you jumped to the conclusion that I don't care about 'women's issues' is beyond me. That someone chooses to start a comment with 'I am a man' or 'I am a woman' is a non-issue. You were the one who had an issue with it.
    I also notice that you have disregarded anything that I have said in regards to Sly – that is telling.

Sign in to comment.