Harper spent Paul Martin's budget Surplus

A blog reader had pointed out that Harper spent Paul Martin's budget surplus. I thought that was well worth looking into because I didn't realize Paul Martin had a budget surplus. Turns out he did. In fact it was bigger than they thought it was. In fact when Jean Chrétien took over from Brian Mulroney in 1993, the budget surplus consistently rose dramatically.

Debt reduction is important. Yet that doesn't mean removing public accountability and privatizing everything under the sun and handing over our democratic sovereignty to large corporations that has no regard for the Canadian economy only their own. That only shoots ourselves in the foot and reduces tax revenue.

A prime example of the false stereotype is in the US. People there claim the republicans will run a surplus while the democrats will run a deficit. History has shown that to be untrue. Bush sucked billions out of their economy to fund the illegal invasion of Iraq based on a lie. The British economy suffered from supporting that lie as well.



Yes we need a military. How many jets and what we use them for is open for debate. Invading countries for their oil is very costly not to mention immoral. That's not even touching on how investment fraud destabilizes the market.

New Liberal Attack Ad

The Liberals new attack add doesn't make sense. He claims that Harper and Layton are two sides of the same coin. Yet the NCC claims anyone who doesn't vote for Harper is a Socialist so who do we believe? Is it really that hard? Everyone claims the NDP will raise taxes but that is exactly what Harper is doing. You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

National Citizens Coalition

Although Harper's quote to the National Citizens Coalition saying it's past time to scrap the Canada Health Act back in 1997 is old, Stephen Harper was president of that lobbyist group from 1998 to 2002. Now he's their candidate of choice for Prime minister.

That lobbyist group still opposes public health care so Harper's denial about a hidden agenda to privatize heath care is a bold faced lie. It is not surprising to see that their adds feed Harper's propaganda claiming everyone that doesn't vote for Harper is a Socialist.

It is a corporate driven propaganda lobbyist group with a secret membership list that pretends to be a citizens coalition when it is not. The Council of Canadians is a grass roots citizens coalition for Democracy. The NCC is not.

Donna Cadman's disappearing act

The headline on the Surrey Now reads: DESPERATELY SEEKING DONA. Looks like she's disappeared again and dodged another debate. It's kind of like that Eddie Murphy movie Distinguished Gentlemen. Dona has name recognition. Her husband did great things for Surrey and Canada. Dona herself is a great person. Yet she is currently somewhat conflicted.

In an earlier interview she claimed she disagreed with the party's position on the HST. I'm sure Harper's control freak censorship crew loved that one. They are the ones that likely banned her from speaking on the issue. Yet her disagreement with the HST runs hollow because she didn't show up for that vote. It would appear that Harper doesn't allow free votes for his party. The broken promise of free votes was so that MPs could vote the way their constituents want. Not in Harper's world.

The HST is just one of many conflicts. Voting for the party that tried to bribe her husband is another. Chuck Cadman ran as an independent after he was shafted by the party. Going back to that party after all the bad things they did is clearly a step backwards. There seems to be a lot of animosity towards Dona these days for her endorsement of Harper. She is a good person. Stephen Harper is not. It's important to draw that line. That would mean doing so at the ballot box this election.

Harper Censorship

Wee it guess this is why Harper’s crew limits press questions and stacks the audience. A journalist asked a question about one of his candidates receiving support from someone charged and acquitted in the Air India bombing Kim Bolan wrote about.

Harper gave a trite denial then when the journalist was asking his follow up question the stacked crowd drowned out his question with cheers and chants. If that’s not poison kool aid, I don’t know what is.

Finding balance in a world of extremes

Since the Anything but Harper campaign is starting to gain momentum, one news article commented on it and did a little bully playing the victim for Harper. They said that eliminating a single opinion wasn't right. However, that's exactly what Harper is doing.

Surely we don't want to go from one extreme to the other. Anything is a pretty big word when we say anything but Harper. Which is unfortunately what we sometimes do in British Columbia. Well that didn't work so let's try this. Well that didn't work either so let's try this. Back and forth from one extreme to the other. The answer is finding a balanced approach to politics and life.

Preston Manning challenged us to look beyond the left and right and look at the issues. That mission was lost when they changed Unite the Bright to Unite the Right and merged with Mulroneyism.

The Shit Harper did web site quotes Harper as once saying "Kyoto is essentially a Socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth - producing nations." Oh really. I always thought the Kyoto Protocol was an international attempt to fight global warming and promote the stabilization of greenhouse gas. What on earth does that have to do with Socialism? Does Stephen Harper really think protecting the environment is a Communist plot to take over the free world? That would be an example of extremism.

Harper does a lot of name calling and over sweeping generalizations. He continually calls people who disagree with him socialists. I suppose if you're a fascist, anything left of fascism would be considered socialism but not in the real world. Harper wanted to ban all other parties from the televised debate except for him and Ignatieff claiming that those are the two choices and of you don't vote for either of those two options you are a left wing socialist or a separatist. Aside from being absurd, what if I was? The founding fathers of the American Constitution were separatists. Everyone has an equal vote in a democratic society. Free speech is not just for the elite. It's for everyone.

I personally disagree with Harper wanting to build a huge number of more jails at taxpayers expense for nonviolent crime like possession of pot. Does that mean I go to the other extreme and support the legalization of all drugs including crack and crystal meth? Let's hope not. Yet that is a position the Green Party has taken. But there's a lot of other things in the Green Party I do support like protecting the environment. No single party is all right and no single party is all wrong.

There clearly are more than two options to vote for this election. I'm voting for Jack Layton because I trust he will protect pensions and medical and he's the only one that opposes the North American Union and the HST. Yet Stephen Harper claimed "The NDP is kind of proof the Devil lives and interferes with the affairs of men." I don't suppose you can get more absurd and offensive than that.

So invading Iraq for their oil based on a lie was not something the Devil would do? How is selling asbestos to India such a Godly thing? How is torturing prisoners in Afghanistan a Godly thing to do? Firing whistle blowers is something the Devil would do. Censoring the media is something the Devil would do. How is sending troops to Afghanistan to cultivate and harvest opium such a good thing? People who have a board in their own eye can't see clearly to take the speck out of their neighbours eye. Indeed by their fruits shall ye know them. That is, by the things they do not just by the things they say they'll do.

Stephen Harper is living proof why a majority government can be so dangerous. I do not trust Stephen Harper with a majority government. But I do believe he has a right to hold and express his opinion. In fact he has some opinions that I do share.

The key is very simple. We need to stop focusing on brainwashing the public and we need to start listening to the public. Remember when the Reform party talked about referendums and giving their MP's free votes? Harper has gone to the other extreme which is far from democratic.

We need to proceed with a Minority government. Move forward on the various political party's common ground and not proceed on any of the party's extremes where there is not consensus. That would mean taking the amendment on the crime bill. It really is that simple.

New Harper Web site

The Vancouver Sun ran an article about a new web site about the Harper government called shitharperdid.com It broke two million hits after it's second day and is a satirical look at what Harper has done trying to encourage youth to get out a vote. Well done.

Harper's Privatization Plans

Claiming that Harper has an agenda for privatization and removing public accountability is obvious. Privatizing prisons and the military is a complete conflict of interest. These programs need to be publicly accountable.

Right after Harper fired Linda Keen for blowing the whistle on an unsafe nuclear reactor in Ontario, he submitted plans to privatize the nuclear power industry to remove public accountability completely and prevent another whistle blower in that industry. I kid you not. This demonstrates a clear contempt for democracy and public accountability.

Money for more Prisons

There is no question that our prisons are over crowed and need more funds. The question is how much more and how do we balance that need with the need for more funding for schools, hospitals and courts.

Headlines in the Surrey Now and the Surrey leader this week read: Delta school board faces $3.49M shortfall and No cash for courts. The first is self explanatory. The second is part of an editorial series called justice denied.

I am very skeptical of giving judges and lawyers more money. That could well be the beginning of the end of our society. Yet my point is, every public program wants more money. Logic dictates that we balance and prioritize those needs.

Prisons need more money as it stands. Changing legislation to put more prisoners in jail will cost more money. Some changes for violent crime are without question needed. Yet to what extreme we want to go is a valid question governing fiscal responsibility.

There is a new court decision in Ontario that some thinks paves the way for the legalization of pot. Not quite. The courts said that if people have prescriptions for medicinal marijuana, then they need to be able to fulfill those prescriptions.

I don't support the legalization of marijuana I support the decriminalization of marijuana and I think it's dangerous if not bizarre that we let courts tell us what kind of laws we can and cannot have in a democratic society. Smoking pot is not a charter right. If you have a prescription for medicinal marijuana that's different.

Anyways, my point remains that rightfully doing away with the 2 for 1 pretrial credit will cost us more money as will implementing mandatory minimum sentences for violent crime which is long over due. Mandatory minimum sentences for the possession of pot is too costly and problematic. Do we really want to close more schools and even courts to pay for more prisons for people who smoke pot? To me that is not being fiscally responsible.

Ignatieff argued against mandatory minimum sentences completely. He said they don't work in the United States so we should not copy and import that failed model in Canada. I'll admit I'm softening towards Ignatieff. I was very concerned about his position on torture but there are indeed more than one issue on the table.

I think his point that we shouldn't copy everything the Americans do because some of their systems don't work is valid. Kinda like Enron. Privatizing everything including our prisons and Energy has proven to be problematic and in Enron's case down right corrupt.

Yet I do think mandatory minimum sentences should exist for violent crime and for selling crack, meth or date rape drug. We also need mandatory minimum sentences for prolific offenders. The VPD is asking for 30 strikes and you're out illustrating how insane the current situation really is. The more property crime someone does the less time they spend in prison. Most describe it as a joke.

If a drug addict commits a prolific number of crimes to pay for their drug, they should have a mandatory three month sentence in prison with no access to drugs whatsoever and no statutory release. That would be in everyone's best interest including the offender.

Harper's hidden $1 billion G8 bill

The auditor general says the Harper government misinformed Parliament to win approval for a $50-million G8 fund that lavished money on dubious projects in a Conservative riding. And she suggests the process may have been illegal.

The report was put on ice when the Harper government was defeated and is not due to be released until after the May 2 election.

However, a Jan. 13 draft of the chapter on the G8 legacy infrastructure fund was seen by The Canadian Press.

It reveals that Industry Minister Tony Clement, the mayor of Huntsville, and the general manager of Deerhurst Resort chose the 32 projects that received funding -- with no regard for the needs of the summit or the conditions laid down by the government.

The report analyzed the $1-billion cost of staging last June's G8 summit in Ontario cottage country and a subsequent gathering of G20 leaders in downtown Toronto.

Harper's $11 Billion Hole

There's no question Stephen Harper is handing out IOUs for candy left right and centre. Yet Ignatieff has pointed out that Harper has refused to provide any financial budgets on how he intends to accomplish those goals. Just like he was found in contempt of parliament for asking the House of Commons to approve his budget without giving the House any details on how much his budget would cost. An unprecedented deception.

Indeed, how many schools and hospitals will he have to close to pay for all the fighter jets his candidate Raymond Sturgeon was paid to lobby for and to pay for all the new prisons to put everyone in jail for the possession of 6 pot plants. Harper wanted the House of Commons to give him a blank cheque and now he's asking voters to do the same.

Ignatieff has accused Harper of paying for his many conflicted fighter jets and his many prisons by cutting federal health-care spending. This accusation is completely plausible since Harper has gone on record claiming it's time to scrap the Canada Health Act.

Harper and the Air Bus cover up

We all know that the Airbus scandal involved Brian Mulroney not Harper. Yet in November, 2007, Stephen Harper had called a public inquiry and appointed future Governor General David Lloyd Johnston as a special adviser, to study the matter and prepare terms of reference for the inquiry. Johnston had once reported directly to Mulroney during his term as prime minister. Like that's not a conflict of interest.

So Johnston reported to Harper on January 11, 2008 that he had found 16 significant questions which required further examination. Harper accepted the report, and stated that a limited public inquiry process would begin once the House of Commons Ethics Committee finished its work. Mulroney wines and complains then finally says he refuses to appear before the committee again.

In 1997, Mulroney settled a libel lawsuit he had brought against the Government of Canada two years previously. Mulroney received an apology and a $2.1 million reimbursement for legal and public relations costs. At issue were allegations that Mulroney had accepted bribes in the "Airbus affair" concerning government contracts. The government said the charges could not be substantiated.

But a key fact was unknown in 1997, and had not been entered under sworn testimony in which Mulroney had denied business dealings or significant meetings with a business associate. Mulroney later confirmed that he had personally accepted cash payments from his business associate Karlheinz Schreiber, a German-Canadian businessman who had been a paid broker for Airbus and other companies. The cash changed hands in three secret meetings in hotels in Montreal and New York City, in brown paper bags of $1000 bills.

Schreiber had at his disposal $20 million from Airbus for the payment of secret commissions. CBC Television reported on February 8, 2006 that the money Schreiber paid to Mulroney originated in a Swiss bank account code-named "Frankfurt". Schreiber used the same account to pay the secret Airbus commissions. Schreiber transferred $500,000 from "Frankfurt" to an account in Zürich code-named "Britan" on July 26, 1993 and used these funds to make the three cash payments to Mulroney in 1993 and 1994.

Sounds like a bad spy novel. Lobbying, bribes, Swiss Bank accounts with code names, all tied to Aribus. They key thing is, for many years, Mulroney had not acknowledged receiving money from Schreiber. The payments were not disclosed in Mulroney's 1995 lawsuit against the Government of Canada. Mulroney had falsely testified under oath that he "never had any dealings" with Schreiber, knew him only "peripherally" and they had a cup of coffee "once or twice." In his 2004 book A Secret Trial, former law professor William Kaplan describes Mulroney's testimony as evasive, incomplete and misleading.

I'd say he lied. He testified in court he had no dealings with Schreiber, then later admits he received $225,000.00 from Schreiber. So since he obviously committed perjury in his initial court case with the Canadian government, does that mean taxpayers will get the $2.1 million settlement back?

The Harper Government claims they didn't read the briefing material prepared by the Justice Department on the Airbus affair and cash payments to Brian Mulroney. OK so they admit it was written down and documented. They just claim they hadn't read it. Like we believe that.

Did he read that his Candidate for Ontario North, Raymond Sturgeon, lobbied for the company selling his coveted fighter jets? One YouTuber suggested they make a movie about the secret affair and call it Kickback Mountain.

Harper's Campaign Bubble not ready to burst

Harper's very controlled press tour just got a little bit more controlling. They kicked out two university students from one of their rallies in London, Ontario because one of the students was guilty of posting a picture of herself with Ignatieff on her facebook. This is unreal.

She was also photographed in the paper attending one of Jack Layton's rallies. She said she just wanted to meet the three main candidates and hear what they had to say. How on earth did his staff know she had posted a picture of herself with Ignatieff on her facebook? Now that is creepy.

Bruce Carson and Stephen Harper

Another Harper lie? You tell me. This one is another insider trading scam. I suppose if the insider trading on the fighter jets is OK for Harper's Raymond Sturgeon then I'm sure a little sweetheart insider trading is fine for Harper's Bruce Carson. Ah but his extensive criminal record for fraud has become a bit of a sore spot.

Harper claims that he never knew about one of his top adviser's criminal record. Oh really? Isn't it common practice to do a security check before becoming privy to classified information? I think it is.

In fact, Bruce Carson said he told Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff in 2006 all about his criminal past and no red flags were raised about him joining the Conservative government as a top advisor.

But Harper insisted Monday there's no way he would have hired Carson if he knew about his criminal convictions for fraud. Personally, I think Harper is lying AGAIN.

The Canadian Press revealed Monday that Carson was convicted on five counts of fraud -- three more than previously known -- and received court-ordered psychiatric treatment before coming to work as one of Harper's top advisers.

There's actually two issues on the table. Bruce Carson's criminal record for fraud is just smoke and mirrors. Harper said he never knew about Carson's criminal record, Carson says he put it on the application forms. I think Harper is lying and Carson is telling the truth.

Yet his criminal record for fraud isn't the real issue. The real issue is the Harper scam he was involved with that also involved a 22 year old escort. One of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s former top advisers is now the subject of an RCMP inquiry for allegedly using his insider connections to land federal contracts worth millions and shovel some of that money to his fiance, an escort that goes by the name of Leanna VIP.

Bruce Carson, 66, was trying to use his political connections to land a deal from the feds that would have seen an Ottawa-based company win a multi-million dollar deal to supply water filtration services for First Nations.

Twenty-two-year-old Leanna VIP, whose real name is Michelle McPherson, works for that company. Carson was trying to set up a deal that would see McPherson get 20% of any purchases the federal Department of Indian and Northern Affairs made from H2O Pro of Ottawa. He’s already bought her a black Mercedes and APTN reviewed records that show the two share a $400,000 house on a two-acre lot with an in ground pool near Ottawa.

Carson is a former lawyer who was disbarred, convicted of theft and sentenced to 18 months in jail in the early 1980s for stealing money from clients of his law firm. But he rebounded from that to work in the offices of three prime ministers - Brian Mulroney, Joe Clark and Harper.

Carson worked as a senior adviser to Harper during Harper's days in opposition through to his becoming prime minister in 2006, and left the PMO in 2008 to become the first executive director of the Canada School of Energy and Environment.

He returned to the PMO briefly for a month in January 2009 as an adviser and then returned to the Calgary-based school.

Bruce Carson's insider trading scam was no different than Raymond Sturgeon's fighter jet scam. The only difference is that Carson's criminal record was made public so he's fired while Sturgeon is an Ontario north Tory candidate. Go figure.



And the scape goat is... William Elliott. CBC claims that The current head of the RCMP was responsible for giving security clearance to one of Stephen Harper's former top advisers with numerous criminal convictions.

Elliott, who was hand-picked by Harper to become the Mounties' first civilian commissioner in 2007, is stepping down in the summer after a controversial reign and public battles with senior RCMP brass over his management style.

So Elliott was hand picked by Harper for the RCMP position and he approved Harper's pal Bruce Carson to be a top advisor despite his criminal record for fraud that he claims mentioned it in his application for the position. Harper didn't know about
Carson's criminal record but William Elliott did and it never occurred to Elliott to mention it to Harper. I find that very hard to believe. I think he did mention it and Harper pulled a favor to get his friend approved for the position.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Harper's still denying it and I still say he full of shit. Harper claims that security clearances are done independanly passing the blame to his pal Elliot.

Former security adviser Bruce Carson was independently cleared to work in the Prime Minister's Office, and it wasn't until later that the "full extent" of his criminal record became clear, Stephen Harper said Wednesday.

There is no way the RCMP wouldn't tell Harper his Senior advisor had a criminal record for fraud. It is far more likely that the RCMP approved Carson's security clearance as a favor to Harper. Now he's trying to pass the buck. Again.

"I already explained that I was aware of Mr. Carson's difficulties a long time ago .… Now later we learned other things, and I'm not sure why that happened, but that's the reality, and we'll have to look at why that happened, and we will be doing that."

So he was aware of Carson's difficulties a long time ago. Now later we learned other things. Like about his insider trading scam getting funneled to his 22 year old escort. Ooops.

-------------------------------------------------------

The network revealed this week that before Carson proposed to Michele McPherson, (the 22 year old escort he was caught funneling government contract funds to) he was involved with another prostitute, Barbara Lynn Khan, a woman who was convicted and served time in the U.S. for money laundering after authorities alleged she ran a prostitution ring.

According to APTN, Khan was an escort at the time she met Carson. The Globe and Mail reported that Khan was convicted in the United States in 2003 for maintaining a bawdy house, as well as aiding and abetting prostitution. The newspaper, citing public records, reported Khan was convicted a year later of the more serious U.S. federal offence of money laundering. She was subsequently deported to her native Canada.

Carson worked for Harper when the Conservatives were in Opposition, helped on the transition team that smoothed Harper’s takeover of power in 2006 and went to work in the PMO for the following two years as Harper’s senior policy adviser and troubleshooter.

Bruce Carson brought a reported ex-prostitute and money-launderer to 24 Sussex Drive to meet with the prime minister and his wife during a party at the official residence, the Conservatives have confirmed.

Property records obtained by The Canadian Press show Khan and Carson paid $400,000 in November 2009 for a condominium in downtown Ottawa. Khan apparently still lives there, although she and Carson have reportedly separated.

MaCleans reports that Mr. Carson’s fiancée’s mother, who works for the water filtration company that Mr. Carson is alleged to have represented.

Protecting Public Medical

Stephen Harper said it's past time the feds scrap the Canada Health act. Public medical is very important to Canadians. Don't give us some bogus iou campaign promise that you're going to break and then privatize our medical system. That is not what Canadians want.

Election Promises and Hidden Agendas

Well the election promises are getting totally out of control in what has become a circus side show of misdirection. The candidates seem to have embarked on a survivor pack competition to stay alive. Vote for me and I'll give you this. Vote for me and I'll give you that. How about no more bullshit promises. They cost too much money and you aren't going to keep your promise anyways.

Balancing the budget is a very important thing. We owe it to our children. We need to do this responsibly not recklessly and we certainly don't need to exploit the debt to rationalize removing public accountability from every social program under the sun. Public accountability is good. Handing over public accountability to large greedy corporations to do what they want with it behind closed doors is bad. Very bad.

Gordon Campbell handed out free Hydro rebate cheques right before an election to trick voters into voting for him and a disproportionate budget. Don't hand out free candy during an election then steal the bread and butter off working families tables once you are elected.

Socialists and Separatists

Harper's not the only one doing the name calling. Ignatieff was upset Harper teamed up with the NDP not long ago and extended parliament. He complained about Harper's new love for Socialists referring to the NDP. We really need to over come the name calling and we really need to stop exploiting the same old stereotypes which are simply false.

Long ago I heard it said that no two people agree on every issue. To that claim I added likewise no two people disagree on every issue either. No matter how far apart two people are politically, there will some some issue that those two people agree on. Common ground so to speak.

Let's talk about the common misconception that the left will be soft on crime while the right will be hard on crime. Well Gordon Campbell was sure a limp fish on crime while Bruce Ralston, Mike Farnworth and Adrian Dix have been very proactive on crime.

I was invited to Dianne Watts nonpartisan coalition on crime press conference she had shortly after she was elected. I saw Penny Priddy there and asked her about it. She just raised her hand and said "I'm here because I'm a mother. When it comes to crime I'm more right wing than most of my opponents."

Preston Manning tried to get us to rise above linear politics when he challenged us to look beyond the left and right and instead look at issues. This is what we still need to do. That vision was lost when Harper merged with Mulroneyism to get elected.

Harper casts anything the bloc has to say aside by labeling them Separatists. Yet in the referendum on Quebec Independence, almost half the people in Quebec voted to separate. That was significant. You can't refuse to listen to anything half the people of Quebec have to say and claim you have any desire for what's best for Canada as a whole.

At one time the Reform Party was labeled as Separatists yet that was untrue. Their platform was if Quebec really wants to separate, the sky will not fall which was true. Alaska functions quite well being separate from the rest of the United States.

There was an absurd editorial in the paper recently saying we should blame the Bloc for the division in Parliament. That is nonsense. Quebec voted to stay in Canada, by a slim margin, but they also continue to elect the Bloc which wants to represent the interest of Quebecers. What's wrong with that? At least they're honest about it. All the other provinces have their greedy little mitts held out seeing what party will promise them what during an election. It's no different.

Tell me this, if the Bloc really wants to put the needs of Quebec first, then don't you think there will be common ground on crime since crime affects Quebec just like it does the rest of Canada? There is common ground between Socialists, Separatists and Neocons. A minority government needs to find that common ground and move ahead with that. A minority government needs to stop being so arrogant and stop refusing to listen to anything the other parties or the voters of Canada have to say.

Harper refused to take the amendment on the anti crime bill. He stacked the senate just like Brian Mulroney did for the GST after Harper campaigned on a promise to establish an elected senate. Harper has broken a lot of campaign promises. He has become a bold faced liar and that is very disturbing.

If the stacked Senate accepted the Liberals amendment to the anti crime bill, it would have passed and become law. Yet Harper refuses to compromise when wisdom directs him to. When fiscal responsibility directs him to. Which leads us to the other false stereotype.

Harper isn't being fiscally responsible. Pork Barrel Campaign promises to get elected are not fiscally responsible. Neither is lying about how much your budget is going to cost and hiding the real figures from Parliament when you ask them to vote on the budget. That kind of dishonesty is not fiscally responsible.

Harper Pisses off Quebec

Well Stephen Harper opens his mouth again and pisses of an entire province. Newfoundland were pissed off at Harper's betrayal last election and completely shut out the Conservatives from the province. That Anything but Conservative campaign I might add was lead by Conservative Premier Danny Williams.

This election Harper returns to Mulroney's pork barrel politics and makes a promise to subsidise a hydro electric dam for the province. Since Harper has a proven track record of breaking his election promises, I have no idea what makes the voters of Newfoundland think he will keep his promise but that's beside the point.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest is taking issue with a campaign promise made by Stephen Harper to finance a hydro mega project in Labrador, saying the federal backing would be the equivalent of offering an unfair subsidy.

Harper has promised financial support for Labrador's Lower Churchill hydro project to build power lines from Labrador through Nova Scotia and potentially into the United States, building it into a competitor for Hydro-Quebec.

Charest told a crowd in Quebec City on Friday that Hydro-Quebec had built its system without federal support and that using federal money to create competition was unfair.

This campaign promise has sure opened a can of worms. Pork Barrel politics is one of them. Pissing off Quebec who he hates and calls separatists is another. Yet it also opens the conflict of privatizing power for profit.

Charest is concerned that Harper will be subsidizing a power proposal that will compete with Quebec. Obviously Charest doesn't care about providing the people of Newfoundland with power. He's concerned with a price war selling their power in the United States. Problematic indeed.

Harper's Coalition Hypocrisy

Harper's trash talking of coalitions not only doesn't make sense, but is very hypocritical. Gilles Duceppe produced a letter signed by Harper agreeing to a coalition in 2004. Harper is railing against the exact same plan he had in 2004.

Clearly we can understand why the Conservatives want to limit questions and choose who asks the questions. The more Harper talks the less credibility he has.

If no political party wins a majority of the seats and if the party with the most seats refuses to form a coalition with one of the other parties, then there is nothing stopping the other parties from joining together and forming the government. Whether it's done on paper or not is irrelevant. The three other parties can vote together on any bill.

They could defeat any bill the party with the most seats but less than 50% of the seats makes and they can vote on and pass their own private member bills without the consent of the Minority government. The people with the most seats control the vote. That is a democracy.

Harper was baiting Ignatieff who responded by saying their will be no coalition. The party with the most seats forms the government. This only shows Ignatieff's Harper like arrogance and stubborn refusal to work with the other parties. Dion was ready to form a coalition with the NDP and the Bloc to form the government. Only the Liberals ditched Dion and replaced him with Ignatieff who broke the coalition and in essence formed a coalition with Harper which comes as no big surprise given his neo con attitude about supporting torture and oil wars under the false guise of human rights.

The Mean Spirit

Take a look at this video clip on Youtube. It's a glimpse at the cat calling mean spirited bullying that goes on in the House of Commons which the Harper Government lives for.

In this video they are making a bold face false allegation and shouting shame. They are all feeding off each other's poison kool aid and they really believe their lie is true when it's not.

I'll go into the hypocrisy of Harper's coalition bashing later but I will point out that Harper is quick to name call. If you disagree with him you are either a socialist or a separatist. I find his persistent misuse of those two terms offensive.

The Harper Government

I had heard mention of the Harper Government before but I hadn't realized that Stephen Harper renamed the Government of Canada to the Harper Government. That realization opened the door to Pandora's box.

There is a lot about this socially awkward misfit that I never realized before. His controlling nature is becoming much more evident and his bold face lies are piling up like Gordon Campbell.

Consequently I've started a new blog to itemize my concerns with the mean spirited dishonesty the Harper Government is perpetuating. I might add that it is not the Harper Government it is the Government of Canada. He does not own it. It is owned by the people of Canada.

He doesn't even have a majority government. All this trash talk about coalitions is absurd. He doesn't have 50% of the seats in the House of Commons. If he does not form a coalition with another political party, he cannot form the government. Him calling his minority government his government is absurd.

It's like putting Drago's picture on the Russian flag in Rocky IV. It's the Canadian Government, not Harper's government. This kind of bizarre arrogance and this kind of departure from democracy needs to stop.