The final chapter of the Progressive downfall in Alberta was precipitated by this very idea of uniting the right. Prentice, Smith and Preston Manning himself helped engineer the scheme to destroy the opposition Wildrose Party so that responsible voters had no where else to turn.
They even appeared to have succeeded at one point. I myself had left Wildrose for dead, at least mentally for a month or so. I never took Prentice up on his limited time free membership for Wildrose members.
But then Progressives were progressive, raising taxes and lording their perceived invulnerability over us. I couldn't stand it. I tried the Progressive brand on for size and it sucked. There was no way I'd vote for taxes. Strategic vote splitting and all that be damned. I will never make that mistake again.
So here we are and Ken Boessenkool is trying to unit the right again. I agree that vote splitting is a real challenge. And while Progressives were keen to underhandedly wipe out the Wildrose outright for the purpose of unity, I don't see why they won't accept the same logic now and retire the PC franchise.
I don't mean a merger with the Wildrose. I mean pack it in. Close it down. Spare us the needless years of NDP "darkness" that we saw when Reform and PC fought federally. Are the Ken Boessenkools of the world willing to accept that? Surrender or nothing. Those are the terms.
If nothing else the last 6 months have proved that is Wildrose is incredibly resilient. If losing the party leader and 8 more MLA's, then facing a snap election and increasing their seat count doesn't show fortitude then what will? I doubt they'll face an existential threat like that again. Wildrose is a hardened player now.
I don't even care about the vote split all that much. If the NDP lasts for 8 or 12 years, it just means that many more people are going to learn the hard way. I wonder how many people would have voted for the Progs if they knew what kind of a blowout it would be? Perhaps they were holding out hope for a coalition? In fact, there is reason to believe that the Wildrose turnout was suppressed quite a bit with everything that went on in the last year.
Wildrose doesn't need to take the 9 remaining PC's either. Derek Fildebrant said that the party is open to conservatives but not opportunists. PC cronies, elected or otherwise need not apply.
Bitterness and resentment however don't belong in a good party. I would recommend accepting refugee MLAs with some tight conditions. They must publicly denounce the PC Party for starters. They should sit as an independent MLA for a year perhaps. And finally their recognition and acceptance into Wildrose be approved by a vote at the AGM. They would not technically be "floor crossing" in this scenario.
In any case it's looking like it's going to be war.
Showing posts with label Coalition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Coalition. Show all posts
Saturday, May 9, 2015
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
The Virtual Coalition
Tom Flanagan has come up with the latest term for what the Liberals, the Bloc and the NDP are planning. A Virtual Coalition is as good a name as any. They plan to overrule the will of the people if they can. Many senior Liberals have independently confirmed the plan while simultaneously denouncing a narrow definition of a Coalition. I've prepared a value added video of Tom Flanagan's discussion with other political strategists.
They think that if they just don't call it a Coalition, Canadians will be okay. Their collective contempt for the mind of a citizen is astounding to behold. They think we can't put it together. If they called it cotton candy, they believe we would suddenly think a coalition with these three was sweet and fluffy.
Not only would a virtual coalition be a betrayal of the electoral mandate and illegitimate. It would be inherently unstable, weak and wasteful. Unstable and wasteful because the Bloc would strong arm it into paying ransom above and beyond what is fair to the rest of Canada, and weak because this situation would leave Canada vulnerable to external shocks to the economy that a natural loser like Micheal Ignatieff is unfit to cope with. The Troika would put us at a competitive disadvantage with huge deficit spending, large tax hikes and general policy instability.
This is why a majority is so important. Winning the election is not enough. We can't count on the word of the opposition parties, especially when they lie so openly about their bid for power. This is truly a two party system. The only problem is that the left wing party is schizophrenic. We don't want a schizo government. Iggy himself doesn't know who he is half the time. He doesn't know he isn't entitled to be Prime Minister.
They think that if they just don't call it a Coalition, Canadians will be okay. Their collective contempt for the mind of a citizen is astounding to behold. They think we can't put it together. If they called it cotton candy, they believe we would suddenly think a coalition with these three was sweet and fluffy.
Not only would a virtual coalition be a betrayal of the electoral mandate and illegitimate. It would be inherently unstable, weak and wasteful. Unstable and wasteful because the Bloc would strong arm it into paying ransom above and beyond what is fair to the rest of Canada, and weak because this situation would leave Canada vulnerable to external shocks to the economy that a natural loser like Micheal Ignatieff is unfit to cope with. The Troika would put us at a competitive disadvantage with huge deficit spending, large tax hikes and general policy instability.
This is why a majority is so important. Winning the election is not enough. We can't count on the word of the opposition parties, especially when they lie so openly about their bid for power. This is truly a two party system. The only problem is that the left wing party is schizophrenic. We don't want a schizo government. Iggy himself doesn't know who he is half the time. He doesn't know he isn't entitled to be Prime Minister.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
A Coalition By Any Other Name...
A Coalition by any other name smells just as rotten. That much is certain. The Liberal brand cannot withstand another blatant and outright campaign lie. Whatever grotesque form the coalition takes, it will certainly not be called a "Coalition." Some of the more perceptive journalists have already picked up on the weasel words used by the Liberals regarding Coalitions.
Here is Andrew Coyne:
Now listen to Jeffery Simpson who is surprisingly clear for an arch progressive:
All but the first if, the outcome where the Conservative Party is elected to a majority, is entirely under the control of the coalition parties. I believe this has been the plan all along.
A losing Liberal party usurping power with their appointed and unpopular leader through an obscure parliamentary technicality is an ugly and dangerous precedent. This may even be legal but it is still wrong, immoral and duplicitous. If Canadians thought their parliament was dysfunctional before they haven't seen anything yet. Gilles Ducepp must be laughing his butt off.
Micheal Ignatieff's own rhetoric about democracy would seem to contradict the affront of the Minor Minority government. It does, but only if you ignore the rhetoric about the "supremacy of parliament." A parliament that outnumbers the largest party is entitled to supremacy above and beyond the wishes of Canadians. This is what aristocrats like Count Ignatieff mean by democracy. He means the democracy of the house granted by winning a seat in a general election, not any democracy that common people will ever come in contact with.
Igantieffs democracy is Soviet style democracy. It takes input from the people but the power lies solely with the elite.
We can see this was the plan all along. Ignatieff's first day wasn't an accident. All observers agree that Iggy should have been prepared for the Coalition question. I submit he was prepared, but wasn't prepared to lie about it.
I'm sure that Liberal agents spent the entire night working out how to allow the Count to explicitly deny a narrowly defined coalition while still planning to seize power outside of an election.
Meanwhile, senior Liberals are available on Youtube describing this situation exactly.
It is clear what the Liberals and their coalition cronies have been planning all along. The only way to stop it, the only option to Canadians who care about this country is to vote in a Conservative Majority. It's the only way to avoid the coming upheavals. Both the Bloc and the NDP will have the power to veto any move that a minor minority will make. The Bloc's goal to tear this country asunder is being realized. It is the duty of any patriotic Canadian to vote Conservative. The Conservative mission is to literally conserve Confederation.
To paraphrase Elrond in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings:
Strangers from distant lands, friends of old, you have been summoned here to answer the threat of Coalition. Canada stands upon the brink of destruction; none can escape it. You will vote or you will fall. Each province is bound to this fate, this one doom. Bring forth the election....
Here is Andrew Coyne:
...if the Conservatives were to win the most seats in the election, but not a majority, and if Michael Ignatieff were to enlist the support of Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe to defeat the Conservatives in the Commons soon after, and if the Governor General, rather than call new elections, asked him to form a government, that would not necessarily imply a coalition government. He might govern as a minority, issue by issue, as Stephen Harper has for the last five years. Or he might strike a more formal agreement, such as the Liberal-NDP accord that brought David Peterson to power in Ontario in 1985. Neither would be a coalition. So when the Liberal leader disavows, as he did on the campaign’s first day, any intention of forming a coalition government with the NDP, or any “formal arrangement” with the Bloc, that does not mean he has ruled out taking power by the process described above.Coyne lays out a convoluted path to a coalition that ends up being even more convoluted in the attempt to remain neutral about it. He even contradicts himself and the reality that Iggy could not bring himself to rule out a coalition on the first day. It took an embarrassing scrum and an over night press release for the Liberals to rule out anything explicitly called a "coaltion."
Now listen to Jeffery Simpson who is surprisingly clear for an arch progressive:
All this [discussion] about “coalitions,” especially “coalitions of losers,” obscures what could arise after May 2. If a prime minister, say Mr. Harper, couldn’t command a parliamentary majority, lost a confidence vote but demanded an immediate election, the Governor-General would be constitutionally correct to ask the leader of the opposition if he could govern. The leader would presumably seek support from other parties in a coalition, an arrangement, an understanding or whatever. If he commanded the confidence of the House, he would govern.We might be getting bogged down in a lot of ifs here. If Conservatives don't get a majority, and if another Conservative minority is elected, and if the throne speech is voted down, and if the Governor General doesn't call another election, then and only then will a Liberal Government seize power with a Minor Minority. A Minor Minority being a party that takes the government writ without winning an election. An insult to democracy.
All but the first if, the outcome where the Conservative Party is elected to a majority, is entirely under the control of the coalition parties. I believe this has been the plan all along.
A losing Liberal party usurping power with their appointed and unpopular leader through an obscure parliamentary technicality is an ugly and dangerous precedent. This may even be legal but it is still wrong, immoral and duplicitous. If Canadians thought their parliament was dysfunctional before they haven't seen anything yet. Gilles Ducepp must be laughing his butt off.
Micheal Ignatieff's own rhetoric about democracy would seem to contradict the affront of the Minor Minority government. It does, but only if you ignore the rhetoric about the "supremacy of parliament." A parliament that outnumbers the largest party is entitled to supremacy above and beyond the wishes of Canadians. This is what aristocrats like Count Ignatieff mean by democracy. He means the democracy of the house granted by winning a seat in a general election, not any democracy that common people will ever come in contact with.
Igantieffs democracy is Soviet style democracy. It takes input from the people but the power lies solely with the elite.
We can see this was the plan all along. Ignatieff's first day wasn't an accident. All observers agree that Iggy should have been prepared for the Coalition question. I submit he was prepared, but wasn't prepared to lie about it.
I'm sure that Liberal agents spent the entire night working out how to allow the Count to explicitly deny a narrowly defined coalition while still planning to seize power outside of an election.
Meanwhile, senior Liberals are available on Youtube describing this situation exactly.
It is clear what the Liberals and their coalition cronies have been planning all along. The only way to stop it, the only option to Canadians who care about this country is to vote in a Conservative Majority. It's the only way to avoid the coming upheavals. Both the Bloc and the NDP will have the power to veto any move that a minor minority will make. The Bloc's goal to tear this country asunder is being realized. It is the duty of any patriotic Canadian to vote Conservative. The Conservative mission is to literally conserve Confederation.
To paraphrase Elrond in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings:
Strangers from distant lands, friends of old, you have been summoned here to answer the threat of Coalition. Canada stands upon the brink of destruction; none can escape it. You will vote or you will fall. Each province is bound to this fate, this one doom. Bring forth the election....
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Iggy Promises a Million Billion Dollars Without Raising Taxes
Count Ignatieff gaffes nicely for us this fine Tuesday morning. He promises "a million billion dollars" for students "without raising taxes," in this video. (that's 1000 trillion dollars by North American convention)
This video makes an important point. The Coalition Parties can make all the crazy promises they want. None of them will get a majority on their own. They will never have to live up to their individual campaign promises. They will never have to live up to their collective promises either, because a Coalition will negate the entire campaign of each participant.
You could just imagine the press conference: "Well we had to give up on the million billion dollars and raise taxes because Finance Minister Layton made it a Coalition condition." They can literally promise the moon because they will never have to give it to you.
The only real promises are Conservative ones. You can count on the Count's hidden agenda to raise the GST and impose a Carbon Tax. They all want it, but they won't say it.
I'm sure it was a mistake. It's what Iggy does best after all and wild promises are the Liberal domain.
Stephen Harper was the one who lowered the GST, not the Liberals like they promised. Stephen Harper led us through the Great Recession while saving us each thousands of dollars. Go ahead, figure out how much the GST cut saved you since it came about. Thousands of dollars each! Real ones. Money that is in your pocket today. Its not some promise that will never actually happen. Conservative promises are right there in your life all around you.
This video makes an important point. The Coalition Parties can make all the crazy promises they want. None of them will get a majority on their own. They will never have to live up to their individual campaign promises. They will never have to live up to their collective promises either, because a Coalition will negate the entire campaign of each participant.
You could just imagine the press conference: "Well we had to give up on the million billion dollars and raise taxes because Finance Minister Layton made it a Coalition condition." They can literally promise the moon because they will never have to give it to you.
The only real promises are Conservative ones. You can count on the Count's hidden agenda to raise the GST and impose a Carbon Tax. They all want it, but they won't say it.
I'm sure it was a mistake. It's what Iggy does best after all and wild promises are the Liberal domain.
Stephen Harper was the one who lowered the GST, not the Liberals like they promised. Stephen Harper led us through the Great Recession while saving us each thousands of dollars. Go ahead, figure out how much the GST cut saved you since it came about. Thousands of dollars each! Real ones. Money that is in your pocket today. Its not some promise that will never actually happen. Conservative promises are right there in your life all around you.
Monday, March 28, 2011
A Coalition Lawn Sign
Earlier today SDA suggested that we call our local Liberal candidate and request a Coalition lawn sign. That made me wonder what one of these signs would look like.
Here it is!
Can you hear it? Sounds like the perfect metaphor for the Coalition to me.
Here it is!
 |
| Coalition Lawn Sign |
Saturday, March 26, 2011
The First Liberal Lie
The first Liberal promise of the 41st election has been released. On the heels of the first gaffe, Micheal Igantieff has promised no Coalition of Losers. First he promised a Blue door and a Red door when asked about a coalition, but while the Count slept his minions toiled over this statement: "coalitions are a legitimate constitutional option." Woops! I'm sure they meant this statement: "We will not enter a coalition with other federalist parties." (h/t Blue Like You)
Smart people know what to make of a Liberal promise. The scientific term is bovine excrement.
He then asks: "Why does he insist on [exposing the reality] about an impending coalition...? (BS filter mine)
The answer is that Canadians need to know what the loser parties have in store for our democracy. The progressive tradition of screaming about one thing while secretly and simultaneously destroying it is on display. They scream about deficits while planning to balloon them. They scream about taxes while planning to raise them. They scream about anything they think you might want to hear, because they think you are just livestock that needs to be herded into a red cattle pen.
End the screaming. Vote Conservative.
Smart people know what to make of a Liberal promise. The scientific term is bovine excrement.
He then asks: "Why does he insist on [exposing the reality] about an impending coalition...? (BS filter mine)
The answer is that Canadians need to know what the loser parties have in store for our democracy. The progressive tradition of screaming about one thing while secretly and simultaneously destroying it is on display. They scream about deficits while planning to balloon them. They scream about taxes while planning to raise them. They scream about anything they think you might want to hear, because they think you are just livestock that needs to be herded into a red cattle pen.
End the screaming. Vote Conservative.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
The Coalition is a Rock Solid Certainty
Here is my logic: The Conservatives will have as a central plank the removal of the $1.95 per vote Party subsidy. The Liberals and the Bloc in particular have not been able to raise money yet somehow foolish bankers still lend it to them. I believe that TD Bank as much as the Liberal leadership will force the Liberals into a Coalition to ensure they don't default on their campaign loans. Since repealing party welfare will be a campaign promise for the Conservatives, it will be considered part of the mandate of a newly minted minority or majority Conservative Government.
As we saw in 2008, the loss of these taxpayer funds is unacceptable to the socialist parties. Mandate or not, the only way to keep the party welfare will be to Coalition. The only way to prevent a Coalition will be to elect a Conservative Majority Government.
There you have it. It really is majority or bust.
I'm sure you've read and watched and heard all the assurances that there will be a Coalition of left wing losers. You've heard it from the Prime Minister and Ministers and all the MPs on down to the lowliest blogger and supporter.
You haven't heard it from the MSM until very lately. Only courageous voices like Roy Green and John Ivison have been able to surface. The CBC and CTV have repeatedly asked the question "is there really going to be a Coalition? Is this just a Conservative boogey-man?" They pretend not to have two brain cells to rub together but don't you believe that either. It's you who they think has only two brain cells give or take. Questioning the Coalition makes it more likely. If you vote Liberal, you vote Bloc and you vote NDP at the same time. Does that help you or does it help those parties and Big Media and Big Unions? Does the Coalition help you, or does it help the groups that hold you back?
As we saw in 2008, the loss of these taxpayer funds is unacceptable to the socialist parties. Mandate or not, the only way to keep the party welfare will be to Coalition. The only way to prevent a Coalition will be to elect a Conservative Majority Government.
There you have it. It really is majority or bust.
I'm sure you've read and watched and heard all the assurances that there will be a Coalition of left wing losers. You've heard it from the Prime Minister and Ministers and all the MPs on down to the lowliest blogger and supporter.
You haven't heard it from the MSM until very lately. Only courageous voices like Roy Green and John Ivison have been able to surface. The CBC and CTV have repeatedly asked the question "is there really going to be a Coalition? Is this just a Conservative boogey-man?" They pretend not to have two brain cells to rub together but don't you believe that either. It's you who they think has only two brain cells give or take. Questioning the Coalition makes it more likely. If you vote Liberal, you vote Bloc and you vote NDP at the same time. Does that help you or does it help those parties and Big Media and Big Unions? Does the Coalition help you, or does it help the groups that hold you back?
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Liberals to Canadians: Take a Hike!
The Liberals, the Bloc, and the NDP, also known as the Coalition, want to raise taxes. These "Tax Cuts" they are screaming about were actually passed in 2007 with their help. There will be no Corporate Tax Cuts in the next budget. The latest Tory Tax Cut took affect this month.
Liberals plan to raise corporate taxes back to 18%. The NDP wants to go higher and the Bloc is happy to extort whatever it can. They want the Conservative Budget to include new higher taxes or face an election.
We will go to the polls. Socialists shall not raise taxes or implement new entitlements while this government has the writ.
Here are some things I expect a Coalition to impose:
Liberals plan to raise corporate taxes back to 18%. The NDP wants to go higher and the Bloc is happy to extort whatever it can. They want the Conservative Budget to include new higher taxes or face an election.
We will go to the polls. Socialists shall not raise taxes or implement new entitlements while this government has the writ.
Here are some things I expect a Coalition to impose:
- Raise corporate taxes. Those are taxes on your RRSP, TFSA, pensions, and other investments.
- Raise the GST. Remember their promises. Remember their whining when it was cut. How many thousands has the GST cut saved you over time? $1000? $2000? $3000?
- Abolish the TFSA
- Return of the Green Shift and a Carbon Tax.
- A National Childcare Service. A new ever-expanding government behemoth to compete with current small businesses. Comes complete with a new Union ready to take your life hostage.
- Canadians will become 'have-nots' just like McDonkey's Ontario.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Better off than 5 years ago: The TFSA
Micheal Ignatieff is asking Canadians "are you better off than you were 5 years ago?"
Of course things are better for just about everybody. Most people take a personal interest in their own well being. Its only natural that in a society that still values personal responsibility things would get better for most of those people.
Canadians can take credit themselves for their hard work, luck and perseverance. Individual success does not come because of government but the skillful stewardship of this country's economy in the last 5 years is a key factor in that success.
One of the greatest tools for our success was given to us by Jim Flaherty and the Conservative Government is the Tax Free Savings Account (TFSA). It allows a person to put away money after taxes that are never taxable again. Any returns your money earns while inside the TFSA is yours too keep. All of it.
Normally, any time you make any kind of income the tax man takes a cut. The gains you make in a TFSA are not taxed. Its yours and you can withdraw it any time. You don't have to wait until you retire.
The amount you can put in a TFSA is $5,000 a year. The program was started in 2009 and that means we can each stuff $15,000 into a TFSA in total. You can make any kind of account into a TFSA. Turn it into an investment account and watch your profits compound monthly just like a credit card. This time you are the visa and the tax man has to keep his pudgy fingers off your returns.
There's a discussion about which is better the RRSP or the TFSA. This is a different question than asking which investment a person should make. A person should make both, because they will need to save for retirement and save money for other large purchases too. The advantage to the RRSP is that the money you put there is all before taxes. Your RRSP is lent out into the economy and goes to work until its your turn to retire. Its a very good thing, however you still have to pay taxes on it once you retire. The idea being that retirees have a far lower tax bracket than a working person.
The TFSA is superior because of the potential to make a lot more money. It may use after tax money to do it, but once the money is in there its never taxed again no matter how much it grows. You can pull it out any time to buy that car or house or vacation.
Brilliant.
The only criticism you can level at the TFSA is that people have been slow to get into it. Its okay. Its never too late, its just that people have missed out on all that growth. Its a free country still and missing out is your right and responsibility. Only a Liberal could complain that the government spent too much telling people about it and that not enough was spent. Nope. The right amount was spent irregardless of what any Liberal windbag thinks. I watched some talking head on CBC give financial advice today and they didn't say a word about the TFSA. They just kept pushing the RRSP. Makes me wonder if Liberals would turf the TFSA all together.
I'm not a financial guru so check it all out for yourself. What I do know is that I'm making about 10% on the money I saved so far and its all mine. Not only am I saving for some major purchase, I'm simultaneously putting money into the economy. The only regret I have is that I couldn't save even more to have made even more. If you haven't got a TFSA already, do yourself a favor and get one. There is more growth to be had, a lot more. Now is the time.
That is the kind of work a government should be doing, not thinking up stupid ways to blow the money they took from me.
Yes, Mr. Opposition Leader, we are indeed better off than we were 5 years ago. We are better off individually and collectively, and the TFSA is a perfect example of that. Its absolutely certain that had we instead been under a Liberal regime we would have suffered under a Green Shift during the worst recession anyone could remember. There would be no TFSA and the recession would have been so much deeper and the deficit so much larger. This is to say nothing of the instability, insanity and political chaos a socialist/separatist coalition would have caused while somehow coherently steering us through this past recession. Who even knows if Canada would have still existed if the Coalition seized power. What a nightmare Mr. Harper has saved us from.
A reasonable person could only conclude that yes we are much much better off now than we have ever been. Thank you honourable Jim Flaherty and the Conservative Party of Canada.
Of course things are better for just about everybody. Most people take a personal interest in their own well being. Its only natural that in a society that still values personal responsibility things would get better for most of those people.
Canadians can take credit themselves for their hard work, luck and perseverance. Individual success does not come because of government but the skillful stewardship of this country's economy in the last 5 years is a key factor in that success.
One of the greatest tools for our success was given to us by Jim Flaherty and the Conservative Government is the Tax Free Savings Account (TFSA). It allows a person to put away money after taxes that are never taxable again. Any returns your money earns while inside the TFSA is yours too keep. All of it.
Normally, any time you make any kind of income the tax man takes a cut. The gains you make in a TFSA are not taxed. Its yours and you can withdraw it any time. You don't have to wait until you retire.
The amount you can put in a TFSA is $5,000 a year. The program was started in 2009 and that means we can each stuff $15,000 into a TFSA in total. You can make any kind of account into a TFSA. Turn it into an investment account and watch your profits compound monthly just like a credit card. This time you are the visa and the tax man has to keep his pudgy fingers off your returns.
There's a discussion about which is better the RRSP or the TFSA. This is a different question than asking which investment a person should make. A person should make both, because they will need to save for retirement and save money for other large purchases too. The advantage to the RRSP is that the money you put there is all before taxes. Your RRSP is lent out into the economy and goes to work until its your turn to retire. Its a very good thing, however you still have to pay taxes on it once you retire. The idea being that retirees have a far lower tax bracket than a working person.
The TFSA is superior because of the potential to make a lot more money. It may use after tax money to do it, but once the money is in there its never taxed again no matter how much it grows. You can pull it out any time to buy that car or house or vacation.
Brilliant.
The only criticism you can level at the TFSA is that people have been slow to get into it. Its okay. Its never too late, its just that people have missed out on all that growth. Its a free country still and missing out is your right and responsibility. Only a Liberal could complain that the government spent too much telling people about it and that not enough was spent. Nope. The right amount was spent irregardless of what any Liberal windbag thinks. I watched some talking head on CBC give financial advice today and they didn't say a word about the TFSA. They just kept pushing the RRSP. Makes me wonder if Liberals would turf the TFSA all together.
I'm not a financial guru so check it all out for yourself. What I do know is that I'm making about 10% on the money I saved so far and its all mine. Not only am I saving for some major purchase, I'm simultaneously putting money into the economy. The only regret I have is that I couldn't save even more to have made even more. If you haven't got a TFSA already, do yourself a favor and get one. There is more growth to be had, a lot more. Now is the time.
That is the kind of work a government should be doing, not thinking up stupid ways to blow the money they took from me.
Yes, Mr. Opposition Leader, we are indeed better off than we were 5 years ago. We are better off individually and collectively, and the TFSA is a perfect example of that. Its absolutely certain that had we instead been under a Liberal regime we would have suffered under a Green Shift during the worst recession anyone could remember. There would be no TFSA and the recession would have been so much deeper and the deficit so much larger. This is to say nothing of the instability, insanity and political chaos a socialist/separatist coalition would have caused while somehow coherently steering us through this past recession. Who even knows if Canada would have still existed if the Coalition seized power. What a nightmare Mr. Harper has saved us from.
A reasonable person could only conclude that yes we are much much better off now than we have ever been. Thank you honourable Jim Flaherty and the Conservative Party of Canada.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Credit Where Its Due.
When the Coalition controversy was raging and the Media was saying Stephen Harper goofed up, I didn't buy it. I was right.
Do you remember how it all began? Stephen Harper had just led the Conservative Party to victory for a second time. A minority government, a greater minority, was just getting started. Then seemingly out of the blue, the Prime Minister slaps the opposition with a motion to cut the $1.95 per vote welfare to the loser parties.
Whah! The audacity. The brilliance. A bold strike against the enemy right where it hurts. I still chuckle when I think about it.
The opposition went into a frenzy. 'To war,' they petulantly cried. The Coalition was revealed, and the 3 socialist parties coalesced. We didn't know this at the time. The media just swallowed the idea that the opposition suddenly had to cooperate against a common foe. They did of course, but they had a plan in place.
The people rebelled. They thought they had beaten the green shift. They were playing the old game of strategic voting and didn't realize the rules would change. ABC, anything but conservative, turned out to be a vote for a socialist-separatist abomination that nobody had voted for.
Stephen Harper was roundly criticized for his "miscalculation." There were even rumors that some insiders had cautioned him not to go ahead with it. I felt it was out of character. There were a bunch of niggling inconsistencies with the media story.
The first thing that had me wondering was Mr. Harper's bold attack in the first place. I had always regarded him as a clever and cunning political genius. Why then would he enrage the opposition? My heart soared with the courageousness and boldness of it, but it seemed out of place.
My awareness was further pricked by the information that this vote , the economic update, was not only a confidence motion. It was a bill pertaining to House Of Commons funds and therefore could only be passed unanimously. Unanimously. The motion was doomed to fail no matter what. This was no miscalculation.
Then we had the NDP conference call. That was great. Jack Layton was snidely bragging about his coalition deal to party members over a conference call. They hadn't changed the call in codes and someone else was listening in. Conservatives obtained this recording. It was taped before the fiscal update. It was released to the public and the media played it.
Two years after the fact, Gilles Duceppe confirms that the Coalition existed before the fiscal update. He even takes credit for most of the wrangling involved to put it together.
Now reevaluate Harper's decision. Remember that the great recession was just a few months old. Nobody knew how deep it would go. It was almost certain that an inherently weak minority government would slowly decline in popularity as times got tough and people got mad. The opposition had their trap set, and Stephen Harper knew all about it.
An inherently weak minority government that is forecast to decline is strongest immediately following an election. If your strength and mandate can only get weaker, the time to strike is immediately. Stephen Harper sprang the Coalition trap and played those tools like a fiddle.
Oh he took all kinds of flak for it, but I knew better. Still think he miscalculated? He's been Prime Minister for 2 years since then. He is the longest running minority Prime Minster in our history. This is also the most dysfunctional and bitterly scheming parliament in our history. He not only outed the Coalition, he beheaded the primary coalition member the Liberal Party, and replaced Dion with an even less capable and less popular Ignatieff.
The skillful handling the Coalition trap saw the Conservative Party at popular heights unimaginable for conservatives in a recession. This is no small feat. The ballot question now is Conservative or Coalition.
There is no one I'd rather have as Prime Minister than Stephen Harper. He has won some spectacular victories, and there are still greater achievements to be had.
Do you remember how it all began? Stephen Harper had just led the Conservative Party to victory for a second time. A minority government, a greater minority, was just getting started. Then seemingly out of the blue, the Prime Minister slaps the opposition with a motion to cut the $1.95 per vote welfare to the loser parties.
Whah! The audacity. The brilliance. A bold strike against the enemy right where it hurts. I still chuckle when I think about it.
The opposition went into a frenzy. 'To war,' they petulantly cried. The Coalition was revealed, and the 3 socialist parties coalesced. We didn't know this at the time. The media just swallowed the idea that the opposition suddenly had to cooperate against a common foe. They did of course, but they had a plan in place.
The people rebelled. They thought they had beaten the green shift. They were playing the old game of strategic voting and didn't realize the rules would change. ABC, anything but conservative, turned out to be a vote for a socialist-separatist abomination that nobody had voted for.
Stephen Harper was roundly criticized for his "miscalculation." There were even rumors that some insiders had cautioned him not to go ahead with it. I felt it was out of character. There were a bunch of niggling inconsistencies with the media story.
The first thing that had me wondering was Mr. Harper's bold attack in the first place. I had always regarded him as a clever and cunning political genius. Why then would he enrage the opposition? My heart soared with the courageousness and boldness of it, but it seemed out of place.
My awareness was further pricked by the information that this vote , the economic update, was not only a confidence motion. It was a bill pertaining to House Of Commons funds and therefore could only be passed unanimously. Unanimously. The motion was doomed to fail no matter what. This was no miscalculation.
Then we had the NDP conference call. That was great. Jack Layton was snidely bragging about his coalition deal to party members over a conference call. They hadn't changed the call in codes and someone else was listening in. Conservatives obtained this recording. It was taped before the fiscal update. It was released to the public and the media played it.
Two years after the fact, Gilles Duceppe confirms that the Coalition existed before the fiscal update. He even takes credit for most of the wrangling involved to put it together.
Now reevaluate Harper's decision. Remember that the great recession was just a few months old. Nobody knew how deep it would go. It was almost certain that an inherently weak minority government would slowly decline in popularity as times got tough and people got mad. The opposition had their trap set, and Stephen Harper knew all about it.
An inherently weak minority government that is forecast to decline is strongest immediately following an election. If your strength and mandate can only get weaker, the time to strike is immediately. Stephen Harper sprang the Coalition trap and played those tools like a fiddle.
Oh he took all kinds of flak for it, but I knew better. Still think he miscalculated? He's been Prime Minister for 2 years since then. He is the longest running minority Prime Minster in our history. This is also the most dysfunctional and bitterly scheming parliament in our history. He not only outed the Coalition, he beheaded the primary coalition member the Liberal Party, and replaced Dion with an even less capable and less popular Ignatieff.
The skillful handling the Coalition trap saw the Conservative Party at popular heights unimaginable for conservatives in a recession. This is no small feat. The ballot question now is Conservative or Coalition.
There is no one I'd rather have as Prime Minister than Stephen Harper. He has won some spectacular victories, and there are still greater achievements to be had.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)