Conservatives...

[justplanecrazy]

Shit, it's been 12 years of Liberal rule and that is why you feel that politics are so pointless. No I don't think the Conservatives will follow through with all of their policies but I do believe they will follow through with a majority, as long as the other parties allow it. Remember when Chretien promised to remove the GST? I think the majority of Canadians actually believed him. Now no-one believes that the government will reduce it by 2%. Why the change of heart? Well, I honestly can't remember one election promise being honored by the Liberals. Mistrust and general hatred of politicians has never been so common in Canada and I blame the Liberals for this. Sure we probably trusted a Lawyer more than a poilitician since the beginning of time but I really don't think the country has been so bitter or at odds with each other in the history of Canada, since they are today. I believe the country will seperate within this decade if the Liberals aren't removed from power. We have a government has 3 ongoing criminal investigations with the RCMP yet the public for some reason isn't willing to get rid of them. Why would you leave them in power? Because you don't think that the other party will change anything? Why not try them and then punish the hell out of them as soon as the other parties force an election, if you're not happy with the result?

[shitdisturber]

The Conservatives were tried; that's why we ended up with the Liberals and why the PC party was annihilated in the next election. "Oh but things are different now, we have a new Conservative party." Led by the nuts from the Reform/Alliance/what are we this week party, and since they've been having troubles convincing Canadians they've changed; one Brian Mulroney. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[justplanecrazy]

How many people from the Conservative party at that time are currently running in the Conservative party?

That's like saying that the Oilers are going to win the Stanley cup this year because 16 years ago, they did. It's been over a decade... players change, and results change!!! The Oilers suck and the Conservatives might actually have something going here, why not try them and find out?The Reform Party and the Conservative party from before, are very different parties, so I don't see how you can say they're no different than before. You do realise that the Reform party's formation was spurred in part by reaction against Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's attempts to negotiate a special status for Quebec within the Canadian confederation. Led by Preston Manning, the party campaigned strongly against the Charlottetown Accord in 1992, and in the 1993 elections it won 52 parliamentary seats, siphoning many votes from the Progressive Conservatives. This is definately not the same party as the Progressive Conservative party was.

[tellyourkidstogetarealjob]

Reading this thread amazes me.

Since 1967 this country has been ruled by the Liberal party the majority of the time (prior to 1967 the Liberals were a fundamentally different party but since that year have been pretty much the same).

Most of THAT time the Liberals were in a majority position in the Commons.

Some of their accomplishments:

Personal basic federal income tax rate of 9% in 1967 compared to 17% today and far more surtaxes bringing the real rate much higher.

A daycare system that's a joke compared to Sweden.

Senior citizen care that's non-existent compared to the U.K.

Hospital waiting lists that are shameful compared to France.

In the G8 the second highest rate of personal taxation.

Higher rates of child poverty than any other Industrialized nation except Australia.

Crime rates in Toronto and Vancouver that have reached the same levels as major U.S. cities - unthinkable in 1967.

They blamed the deficit and high taxes on military spending in the seventies so they destroyed the military.

They blamed gun violence on unregistered weapons so the threw away $2 billion on a gun registry but don't have to account for it because the U.S. is there(importation of illegal weapons). The Liberals don't hate the U.S., they LOVE the U.S. If the Americans weren't there they would have no one to blame their administrative screw ups on.

Now, when it is apparent they have arrogantly given us the most corrupt administration this country has seen in decades they have another answer: gay marriage and protecting "Canadian values", whatever the f*ck that is.

The whole gay marriage bit has little to do with the "Christian right", because such a thing barely exists in this country. It has lots to do with a Liberal government distracting a stupified public into ignoring the real issues of what they have stolen from me and you and the money pissed away trying to bring about their socialist utopia.

All this being brought to you by a party led by a man who shows so much confidence in Canada he took his own company offshore and registered his ships in Barbados and Liberia so he wouldn't have to adhere to Canadian safety standards, employ Canadians, or pay Canadian taxes (unlike you and I).

But it'll probably work because just enough voters will buy into their propaganda. Some of whom contribute to this thread.

[ScudRunner]

Another good conservative policy that I know they will carry through on is an elected senate. aboot time eh!

[North Shore]

DustDevil wrote:

Why don't you educate us on the green parties platform? What do you like or dislike

Here you go fill your boots: http://www.greenparty.ca/article70.html Why am I strongly considering parking my vote there? Several reasons. I'm sick and tired of voting against a party (ie:'Don't vote for Martin, he's corrupt' or 'don't vote Harper, he's scary' and so on..) so I'd like to vote for something. A quick glance at the websites of the 3 main parties shows very little/no attention being paid to the environment - why is that, when our continued comfortable existence on the planet depends upon our stewardship of it? No mention, either, of the looming energy crunch that faces us ( although I will give the Cons credit for their biodiesel initiative.) I hope that, by my and others' voting green, the major parties will start paying a lot more attention to environmental issues.

Also, they have cool t-shirts!

Justplanecrazy wrote:

Not sure where you got your numbers from but I've never seen any record of the Liberals paying off any debt

Fraser Institute good enough?:http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/re ... =pb&id=670 also, StatsCan: http://www.statcan.ca/english/edu/feature/data/debt.htm Doesn't mention the Liberals in as many words, but if you look at the time frame...

The defecit is simply the interest on our debt

Hmm, we may be arguing the same thing here, but I have always been under the understanding that if the Gov't spends more in a year than they take in, the the result is a deficit. If they do that for more than one year in a row, then the accumulation is the 'National Debt.' I think perhaps you are referring to the government running operating surpluses (as they have since ~'93) but, due to interest charges, running a deficit. We did this until PM's 1996 budget, which was the first time since about 1960 that the government of Canada has spent within its means.

I may be following in blind faith here but I believe that if any party will manage to make this country more profitable and pay down the debt, it'll be the Conservative Party

Perhaps so...It's political suicide for any party to run a deficit nowadays - even the party (although they've never been able to prove their critics right or wrong) with the worst reputation for being fiscally irresponsible, the NDP, is promising a balanced budget. In any case, it seems as if we are in agreement that the next government to continue paying off what we owe...

edited for clarity..

[mantogasrsrwy]

Sorry to burst your bubble....maybe you should have read the whole article "The net direct debt of all three levels of government in Canada fell from $847 billion to $789 billion between 1997/98 and 2001/02. This is a small drop compared to the growth in debt over the last decade: it was only $533 billion in 1990/91."

However "The bad news is that the $58 billion drop in debt was more than offset by increases in other liabilities such as program obligations, which grew significantly from 1997 to 2001. The net increase in total liabilities over this period was $278 billion. "

[justplanecrazy]

hahahaha.... thanks for the great report North Shore. I was going to write the same thing but I'll break the numbers down a little more. In the Past 16 years our direct debt has gone up 59% and then down a modest 7% resulting in an overall increase of 48% in direct debt over the past 16 years. May I remind you that 12 of those years were under Liberal rule.

That's not the worst of it though. That 6 years of direct debt reduction with a 7% decrease in direct debt resulted in a net increase in total liabilities of $278 billion. In other words a 7% decrease in direct debt and a 33% increase in total liabilities.

With the amount of money that Canada is making on oil revenue and natural resouces in this day and age, we should either be practically tax free or paying off huge chunks of our actual debt. Instead, we have decreased our direct debt slightly but only with an enormous increase in total liabilities. I love Martin's ad implying that our strong economy is due to his party. Alberta is the main reason for our recent strong economy and that is in no part due to the federal gov. This should be our time to shine, not simply get by. People open your eyes PLEASE!!!

tellyourkidstogetarealjob don't forget the 1995 referendum where our Country was within a couple of percent of splitting and the Liberals used it as a blind to siphon money to their friends. Imagine if the US was about to split? Do you think that the government would sit back and watch them vote? Do you think the people would keep that Government in power if they did? Our government should have been out there educating them, showing them the results if we quit, talking to them, finding out what they want that won't effect the rest of Canada. After listening to Quebec's demands the Conservatives made the following announcements:

-Allow Québec to play a role in international institutions, such as UNESCO, where its cultural responsibilities are at stake, based on the model of the Francophonie Summit;
-Correct the fiscal imbalance between the federal government and the provinces; and
-Recognize provincial autonomy as well as the special cultural and institutional responsibilities of the Québec government.

This is the biggest step that anyone has made in bringing our country back together again. Hell if all it takes is to give them a voice, then why didn't we do it in 1995. And provincial autonomy... after Quebec goes, don't be surprised if the west to follow suit unless this is changed. I love how the government managed to just dumb the crisis down and act like it was no big deal. Canada would be hit hard if we split up, and every election, the Seperatist party is getting more and more votes.

[Bede]

Just so everyone knows, 30% of governement revenues go towards servicing the debt. As an example, if you make $60K/year, you are paying $20K of credit card interest per year. You're not even paying off the balance, just paying the minimum payments! If the debt was paid off, we could get a 30% tax break, or more social goodies for you leftists. Perhaps it's time to stop spending (you too Harper), and pay down the debt.

Short term pain for long term gain.

[shimmydampner]

Crime rates in Toronto and Vancouver that have reached the same levels as major U.S. cities - unthinkable in 1967.

ARBITRARY "FACT" ALERT

[oldncold]

OK LETS us see

defense stronger -good
more ships to patrol our waters
and stop overfishing and pollution
thats called a effective co-policy enviromental and national defense= proper use of taxpayer $$$


guns for border guards = good bad guys not so good

banning gun registry 2billion = good ( that buys alot of healthcare or daycare) = good use of tax $$


less gst == more beer !!! =good taxpayer policy more more $to go to restaurant== good .


finally someone who is saying you are responsible people and we the
conservatives are going to let you have the responsibility. instead of
the liberal FLOWER CHILDREN running this country saying the gov't should be running every thing in your life . from the diapers to the funeral parlour.



besides IMHO the liberals haven't had a orginal idea since the mapleleaf flag was introduced in 1965.

[justplanecrazy]

For all of you concerned about the latest Liberal scare tactic stating that the Tories will put us in debt, you should be happy to know that the Conference Board of Canada has confirmed that the Torie plan will do quite the opposite.

Shortly after the Liberals released their statement Sunday, the Conservatives issued a letter of their own from the Conference Board of Canada, insisting their program is properly costed out.

The statement contends the party platform is fully affordable in each year from 2005 through to 2011.

"In summary, we found that the Conservative Party's economic platform is affordable in each fiscal year from 2005-2006 through 2010-2011," Paul Darby, the board's deputy chief economist is quoted as saying.

"In each year there is enough fiscal room to pay down at least $3 billion a year in debt, as in the (government's) fiscal plan."

The organization, which was given access to the entire Tory platform to conduct its analysis, also found that there is substantial surplus in the Conservative fiscal plan.

"Over the five-year forecast horizon to 2010-2011, the CBoC economic and fiscal outlook suggests that there remains $15.7 billion in unallocated fiscal room, over and above the annual debt payment, which provides further cushion to ensure that deficits do not occur due to adverse economic effects," Darby said.

This certainly seems a little more reliable, having a conference board of Canada doing the number crunching with full access to the Conservatives numbers breakdown. I'd definately believe that over the Liberals projections on Conservative debt done by their own financial advisors based on some media releases by the Tories. It amazes me how far the Liberals will stretch to try and scare the public about the Tories and even more so, how many idiots they sucker in with this B.S.

Did you notice in their scare ads they also are saying that Harper would have taken Canada to war in Iraq. Well not only are we currently in Iraq as we speak, despite the public being told we are not, but the Liberals also said that as soon as the UN sanctions the attack, that we'd join. The reason for that was Chretien trying not to limit his possibilities of sitting on the council. It wasn't a secret that after his retirement he wanted to join the UN. He knew that if he said ok to the attack when the UN hadn't sanctioned it, that'd he'd be eliminating that possiblity. Nothing like making National descisions based on your own career interests. In the end it turned out for the best, but I love how the Liberals try to make it appear like it was their wise judgement and not personal greed that resulted in this.

[cyyz]

Heard the latest Liberal commercial on the radio, I have to admit, Brilliant, really well done "Harper wants to take away child care and give you $25/week." <bravo>

But the real reason why the people support the liberals is because they like banging the 14 years olds and don't want the laws changed back to 16...

[Dust Devil]

Heard the latest Liberal commercial on the radio, I have to admit, Brilliant, really well done "Harper wants to take away child care and give you $25/week." <bravo>

But the real reason why the people support the liberals is because they like banging the 14 years olds and don't want the laws changed back to 16...

LOL

[LH]

Someone already asked how many of the same members of the Mulroney Conservatives are still in the Party now and hold any power of any sort. One could ask the same question as it pertains to the Liberal Party of 15 years ago.

Ever hear of something called "the back-room boys" of both the Conservative and Liberal Parties. Even the NDP have "back-room boys". Know of anyone who voted anywhere in Canada in any Federal elction for someone called Jean Carle? How many voted for Michael Kirby anywhere in Canada in ANY election for ANY Party? These are just a very few who control "the strings" and weild immense power. The Conservative Pary has them too. They get to advise on who should become a Minister and why, get to be asked their advice about proposed programs, laws and Acts, etc., etc. You get to help pay their unknown salaries, watch them get appointed to government posts and get to pay-out their pensions when they leave those posts or "the back-room".

Be afraid of them folks and not the "window-dressing" out front because that's exactly where they are....."out front". That's why the other guys are called "the back-room boys" and are also called "the KIng-makers" because they can weild un-seen power and don't have to answer to you. Some of them reside in seats in the Senate and you pay their salaries there AND you get to pay their salaries while they are weilding power in "the back-rooms" also........AND best of all......you can't kick them out of their Senate seats because YOU didn't put them there.

Canadians actually expect that the Party in power is going to allow an elected Senate and pass a law making it so? Why in the hell would they shoot themselves in the foot by doing that?

[justplanecrazy]

LH did you not read the whole post? For someone who acts all knowing because of his age you sure don't know your history.

You do realise that the Reform party's formation was spurred in part by reaction against Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's attempts to negotiate a special status for Quebec within the Canadian confederation. Led by Preston Manning, the party campaigned strongly against the Charlottetown Accord in 1992, and in the 1993 elections it won 52 parliamentary seats, siphoning many votes from the Progressive Conservatives. This is definately not the same party as the Progressive Conservative party was.

The Reform party took down the Progressive Conservative Party because they didn't agree with their platform. The Reform party was the complete opposite of the Conservatives. When they merged with the Conservatives, they had more seats and more political power than the Conservatives. Who's in the front now? Well it's not the Conservative members, its the old Alliance and Reform members. They are simply running under the Conservative banner so that they aren't labeled racist redneck Christians by all the morons that don't bother looking at the truth. If you think that they are somehow the Conservative Party of before, even though the majority of their members are the ones that took them down and were a completely opposite party, then I'm baffled. It looks like you've had blue/red colored glasses and didn't notice the green that removed the blue from politics.

On the other hand, the Liberals have shown us that they haven't changed, year after year. They haven't been sitting on some back bench for 15 years without having a chance to show us who they are. Year after year there were new players and old ones leaving but they continued with the same lack of action and corruption as the old players. They've made it very clear that they aren't changing and its time to try someone new, and no they're not a reincarnation of the old Progressive Conservatives.

[marktheone]

Crime rates in Toronto and Vancouver that have reached the same levels as major U.S. cities - unthinkable in 1967.

ARBITRARY "FACT" ALERT

All factors of crime are actually down in Canada. It is government propaganda and the Liberals want to get rid of firearms. That is not arbitrary.

[justplanecrazy]

There's an alarming increase within the last 5 years but you're right that the overall rates over many years has shown a decrease.

[LH]

justplanecrazy ----I read and understood your post. I am also not "all knowing" and don't plan on being so because I enjoy sailing on water and not walking on it.

There has been no "Conservative Party" in Canada since the mid 20's.......and the Party now bears scant resemblance to the Conservative Party of John A. MacDonald. Mulroney constantly referred to John A. MacDonald, but I doubt very much that he and John A. would have had much in common politically-speaking. NAFTA would have made John A. croak. In the mid 20's the Conservatives and the Progressives merged to form the Party we know today. If you check on who the Progressive Party was and their beliefs and platforms, you will see that they were a 20's version of the Reform and Alliance Parties. I've said it before and I'll say it again..."there is very little new history because we just keep on repeating the same stuff over and over again.". The Progressive Party was created for exactly the same reason that you state the Alliance and Reform Parties were. The "problems" concerning Quebec aren't new at all and have been with us since before Confederation. You had the Rebellion with Louis Papineau in the 1830's and then you had a similar thing with troops involved, bombs and people dying with the FLQ........all about the same thing and typical Canadian "troubles". So it didn't start when you and I were born. There were a few things that happened in Canada before we blessed the landscape.

May I suggest that it is YOU who has misunderstood me. I've only stated that most of what comes out of Harper's mouth is the considered opinions and advice of the Conservative "back room boys". Ditto for Paul Martin and the Liberal Party. You nor I have any idea what they are suggesting with both parties, we will not get to know them or elect them and can't fire them either...........BUT we'll damn well pay their pensions for service we never asked for nor wanted.......and therfore didn't hire in the first place. I want whatever comes out of Harper's, Martin's or Layton's mouth to be their ideas because THEY are the leaders of their parties and not have someone in "the back room" operating their mouthes like a ventriloquist. We all got a peak at that kind of crap with the Adscam scandal and......hold-on.......the Conservative "back-room boys" have been involved in the EXACT same kind of thing themselves when they were in power. If someone is going to rule over me and make laws, then I want to elect them. How much clearer can I make that. Disagree with me on that point if you so choose, but that's my position.

We are a socialist-leaning nation of people who for eons have wanted government to take care of us. Therefore, we either side with the Liberals , who are in the center or vote for the socialist CCF, Creditistes or NDP. The Conservatives have always been considered Right-wing and are closely parallel with the Republicans in the US. Many of their Principles and platforms are copies of one another, but not all. Thereffore, history shows us that whenever a Liberal government is in power in Ottawa, relations with the US are low if a Republican Party is in power and they are good if the Democrats are in power because they share many of the same values again.

[justplanecrazy]

LH you crack me up. The Progressive Conservatives had an opposite platform to the Reform Party. When the Conservatives were in power, they were not right wing fanatics. So who was John A. Macdonalds "Back Door Boys" working for then, the Conservatives or the Reform Party? You agree that the parties are completely different but somehow they were both run by the Conservative Back Door Boys? If that was the case, why would the one party take a completely opposite stance and destroy the other party? Maybe the back door boys split up, some went gay some went transvestite. Also, the liberals have changed drastically. They went from Trudeau's lunatic left wing stance to todays supposedly center stance. Martin was against Gay Marriage in the last election... a little different than Trudeau's stance back in the day.

If you spent a little bit more time researching the current players instead of dreaming up Conspiracy theories, you'd realise that Harper is the leader of the Conservatives and he is running off of his ideas. Look back at Harpers lectures before he was leader of the Conservatives, before the Alliance, or even before the Reform Party. Harper has had the same stance throughout with more decisions at the provincial level, less federal red tape programs and greater diversity among the provinces. This is what he's running on now. Sure you could say that is why the group selected him, but if he's selected for his ideas then who cares if the some hidden group is running the party. If they like what he's saying and that's why he's running then you just have to decide if you like what he's saying also.

Before you equate the Conservatives with the Republican party in the states you should understand that all parties in Canada are way further left than either party in the US. If that is truly what you believe than you must have taken the attack ads of the last race to heart. Personally I think the Conservatives are more left wing then the Liberals were 12 years ago. Stop listening to the media spins and start researching the party yourself. Bottom line, the Conservative party is not the Conservative party from before and yes we will see a change in the way Canada is run just like we've seen changes in parties, despite the same name.

[Dust Devil]

I get a kick out of paul martin during the debates. He was trying to blame the fact that the Liberals haven't done jack shit to get tough on crime because they put legislation up but it was cancelled because the opposition forced an early election. WTF have they been doing for the last decade

[LH]

justplanecrazy -------the Progessives had an opposite platform to the Conservatives also, but they merged and that's all I was saying.......that it's happened before. At NO TIME did I state that the Conservatives were EVER "Right-Wing fanatics". One can be "right of center and be right-wing without being a "fanatic". The NDP are "left of center" and they aren't "fanatics" either........so where did you get "fanatic" from?

John A. MacDonald had "back room boys" and Canadian history tells us who they were. I highly doubt that any of John A. MacDonald's "back room boys" were alive to have much to say about the merger between the Conservatives and the Reform.......so you lost me on that one.......try again, but leave bodies that have been dead for 100 years out of it because they don't control shit anywhere.

At NO TIME did I say that both Parties were different but were run by the same group of "back-room boys". They both have THEIR own "back-room boys" and sure as hell aren't going to share those guys. This ain't anything new and nobody has to be a "fly-on-the-wall" to know what the typical "goings-on" are with regards those groups. Anyone following elections or the political scene in this country has heard them referred to many, many times. Your not knowing about them or never hearing about them before says much about how long you've been an adult following politics in this country.

Trudeau was a reflection of the public's morals and traditions of THAT time and to compare the feelings of the Canadian population in the 70's to today, is frankly "mis-informed" and kinda dumb and I believe you'd find most would agree. I've changed greatly in my views on a many things in the last 35 years, including politics......but some have stayed the same.

Justplanecrazy, if you have NEVER heard the expression "back-room boys" for ALL politcial Parties before and you believe it is some "conspiracy theory", then YOU better go to see someone whose opinion YOU trust and ask them if they've ever heard of them before and what their roles are in each Party. If you also believe that because that what comes out of Harper's, Martin's and Layton's mouths are their ideas and everyone "dances to the tune they play", then you are misinformed and heavily naive. They are "Leaders" of their Parties, but they can loose that "leadership role" if "other un-mnamed people of power" want them gone. John Deiefenbaker found that out quickly when he crossed swords with one of the Conservative "back-room boys"......Dalton Camp. I'll leave you read Canadian history on that one and then MAYBE you'll understand the term "back-room boys".

The Conservatives believe in LESS government within our lives and believe that business is the sector who will make our country prosper and grow strong. That's what they believe now, that's what they believed since their inception and that makes them Right-wing The Liberals believe in of that also, but also believe MORE government control of various things in government and Canadian society.........and that makes them in the Center. The CCF/NDP believe that business should never be trusted completely because they prey upon the average Canadian worker and want business "on a short rein". They want the government to have control of this, control of that and constantly talk about the average Canadian worker. They are normally Union-backed and have been since the days of the CCF and J.S Wordsworth......and all that makes them Left of Center. There's no disgrace in this at all and none intended towards ANY Party when I posted that. There's even a Communist Party of Canada for those that want to vote waaaaay Left of center and believe that government should control EVERYTHING.

[Dust Devil]

The Conservatives believe in LESS government within our lives and believe that business is the sector who will make our country prosper and grow strong. That's what they believe now, that's what they believed since their inception and that makes them Right-wing The Liberals believe in of that also, but also believe MORE government control of various things in government and Canadian society.........and that makes them in the Center. The CCF/NDP believe that business should never be trusted completely because they prey upon the average Canadian worker and want business "on a short rein". They want the government to have control of this, control of that and constantly talk about the average Canadian worker. They are normally Union-backed and have been since the days of the CCF and J.S Wordsworth......and all that makes them Left of Center. There's no disgrace in this at all and none intended towards ANY Party when I posted that. There's even a Communist Party of Canada for those that want to vote waaaaay Left of center and believe that government should control EVERYTHING.

Unfortunatly because of where the liberals fit into the political spectrum it's has turned them into the party to go to if you want to be able to flip flop on issues. Rarely do the conservatives or NDP flip flop on issues. (they may shut up about their ideas eg. the death tax" They are too different to do that. But in the intrerest of maintaining power the Liberals will do and say whatever it takes to get a vote. If the NDP want corporate tax cuts scraped "no problem". If the conservatives want corporate tax cuts "no problem". they monkey around back and forth and nothing gets done. Layton likes to say that he is the one who got things done in the house this year. Guess what. Not a damn thing got done because the Liberals we're playing mickey mouse games with their dozen or so mini budgets.

[LH]

Sorry Dust Devil, but the Conservatives have "flip-flopped' before when thety were in power and so have the NDP on the provinicial level, boith in my province and in BC. "Flip-flopping' isn't the private domain of the Liberals only or vise versa.....for the Conservatives. Any Party in power will do what they have to do to remain in power....and if they don't....they don't remain in power.

The liberals have been in power for many years and many times over the eons for one simple reason. We are considered worldwide as a socialist nation. We don't want government sticking their noses into every little part of our lives and want people to be able to succeed or fail on their own most times.....without the 'crutch" of government help.......BUT we want to "be taken care of" by our governments all the same. The Liberals "mirror" that desire because we'll go with the Conservatives sometimes, but we feel they are "pro-business" in their principles and we don't quite trust business all that much and it makes us leery of them. Many of us also find the NDP to be a "little too socialist" for us and don't want government sticking their noses into everything in some manner, but we still like some of their ideas. Layton climbing into bed with Harper would therefore be a lot more tenuous relationship than Layton doing the same with Martin. That's because the Liberals are "down the middle of the road" and many (not all) of their ideas have a Conservative AND an NDP tinge to them.We are a nation of "compromisers" in practically everything we do and therfore many times the Liberlas have been considered "the compromise" between Right and Left.

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a Conservative MAJORITY government come election night and here's why I think that way. We want to spank the Liberals really bad for screwing-around with out monies and becoming arrogant from being in Ottawa too long. We'll probably kick them out to teach them a lesson and bring in the Conservatives. They'll be in for awhile and after so long we'll want to teach them a bad lesson for some reason and do the same to them. It always makes me laugh when I remember how Mulroney came to power. We kicked tha Liberals real hard in the ass and they got a land-slide victory that night. By the time Mulroney was the mosr hated man in Canada, I'll be damned if I could find ONE person ANYWHERE who admitted to voting for Mulroney and the Conservatives that night. I therefore joked that Mulroney must have then attained power by the one vote cast for him by only Mila Mulroney.

[WJflyer]

The one thing with the Conservatives is that they actually get some movement on defense issues. Who got moving on replacing the Navy's aging fleet of St. Laurent, Restigouche, Mackenzie, Annapolis class destroyers with the current fleet of Halifax class frigates (which in reality are more like destroyers due to their size and firepower)? The Conservatives did. Who actually got some progress on replacing the Sea King choppers before another government axed the programme? The Conservatives. Who replaced the ageing fleet of Huey and Twin Huey's in CF service (although with a really crappy replacement, but a replacement, all together)? The Conservatives. Who replaced the Navy's ageing fleet of training vessels? The Conservatives. Who procured the current fleet of Coyote recon LAV's (of which the CF are very proud of)? The Conservatives. Who replaced the Army's jeeps when it became clear that they need to be replaced (when though their replacements, the Iltis, was pure crap and was way overbudget)? The Conservatives. Who got new rifles for the military when it became clear that the current rifles were getting long in the tooth? The Conservatives. The Conservatives actually takes care of our forces by getting equipment that the CF needs to operate.