Best Ignatieff Line: "there is no ethnic vote: ‘A Canadian is a Canadian’"

I love that quote. The Conservatives keep talking about winning the ethnic vote, while Ignatieff says there is no such thing, only the Canadian vote. I remember when Stephen Harper was fear mongering to immigrants about same-sex marriage:

Mr. Harper drew criticism not only from within his own party, but from some of the very people he had hoped to attract. "Mr. Harper is ignorant about mmigration issues, and his statement reflects that ignorance," said Tarek Fatah of the Muslim Canadian Congress, a grassroots group with a membership in the hundreds. "What he's saying is that people can only be gay if they're white Anglo-Saxons."

Everyone is pigeon holed.

Harper's Family Tax Plan Only Goes Into Effect After You're Dead

Harper announced a family tax plan today, but he said that he will first have to pay for the F-35s, the prison expansion and his corporate tax cuts. Then he'll worry about your family. But the good news is, he plans to put more of your children in jail, so you won't have to worry about feeding them. Do you think that's what he meant by savings for families?

... the Family Tax Cut plan announced by Mr. Harper Monday in Saanich, B.C. wouldn’t come into effect until the federal budget is balanced, which could be years from now. Like pension splitting before it, splitting earned or other income for tax purposes would benefit only some families and be no help at all to singles, including single parents. To get the full benefit, even qualifying families would have to have a large income disparity between the higher and lower wage earners. Even then, a maximum of $50,000 of household income would be splittable for tax purposes.

Can't wait until tomorrow when he announces a childcare plan that goes into affect when they're old enough to take care of their aging parents.

We Can't Think About a Harper Majority. We Have to Focus on a Harper Unemployed

Heather Mallick asks: What if Harper's dream of a majority comes true? It should read what if our nightmare of a majority comes true. But it won't. We won't let it happen.

A Harper majority government would be dishonest. That's an easy one, they're Dodgy Inc. now, with their in-and-out campaign financing, lying to Parliament, allegations of illegally blocking freedom of information, killing the long-form census to cater to invented online outrage, wildly underestimating the cost of those Lockheed Martin jets, padding the Senate they previously vowed to reform, accepting fat MP pensions they once decried . . . I could go on but lack the space and sometimes the will to live, frankly.

A recent poll shows that Canadians know the Harper government tells whoppers. For the Harper regime, lying is a core value, to the point where there's a bouncy aggressive incredulity when they're questioned about it in the House of Commons. They regard opposition MPs as dogs lunging at a G20 wire fence when they've already been trained with electroshocks to never do that again.

Murray Dobbin in the Tyee is also Contemplating the Unthinkable Harper Majority. Five years of minority has frustrated their ambitions:

They couldn't slash Medicare or gut the Canada Health Act. They couldn't cut transfers to the provinces, or further weaken EI. They left the public services unions with their rights intact. They had to leave education alone (more or less). And they didn't risk slashing the civil service they hate so much. Even the CBC has been spared (though they raised millions from their loyalists attacking it in fundraising letters).

The frustration level, especially for Harper, must have been almost unbearable. Remember, this is a man who got so frustrated being in Opposition as right-hand man to Preston Manning that he bolted from politics altogether. The place he chose to cleanse himself after all those years having to play the democrat was the National Citizens Coalition, by a big margin the most right-wing organization on the national scene. He said he was glad to be out of politics so he could say what he really thought.

So we can't even use the "M" word anymore than we can use the "C" word. And in fact, we can't even contemplate another mandate. I have to be able to sleep nights.

Stephen Harper Advertising for People to Leave Right-Wing Comments at On-Line News Items. Can you Smell That?

The Harper campaign is advertising on Craig's List for someone to leave comments at the end on news items. Can you smell the desperation?

I leave comments lots of times for free. You have to submit a sample so I think I have something.

"C'mon you leftie rag, Liberal shills ... how bout reporten sumpin tru fer a change. That Iffy gonna haf him a colition with dem traters the Blok an dem dar soshilists just as sur as i'm gonna drank me won mor twofer"

Do you think I'll get the job? I wonder what it pays?

Come on everyone. Send a sample and see how soon they shut it down.

With Harper Still Stuck on the "C" Word, Michael Ignatieff is on Fire

Stephen Harper is still stuck on the "C" word, but Ignatieff is not taking the bait. As one woman wrote to the CBC, if I read 'coaltion' one more time, I'm going to poke my eyes out. So if his strategy is just to annoy people, I say keep going.

Michael Ignatieff has already moved on, taking the focus off the "C" word and putting it on the economy.

Ignatieff goes on the attack over economics

Tory focus on 'jets and jails' threatening to bankrupt Canada, Ignatieff says

And Harper's election gravy is the promise of a plan that won't start for five years. In five years we'll be saying "Stephen who".

G20 was a ‘$1-billion Harper photo-op’ that accomplished nothing: Ignatieff

If you can stomach one more "C" word, here goes:

Harper's Lawsuit Against the Canadian Taxpayer Has Cost Us $1.3 Million

Despite the fact that you would be hard pressed to find anyone who agreed that fabricating receipts to get taxpayer money you weren't entitled to, was legal, Stephen Harper sued us anyway.

And we just got the bill. $1.3 million. I think we should add that to his tab.

I Love the New Ignatieff 'Eyebrows" For the Press. Where Can I Get a Pair?

The Ignatieff team was handing out fake 'Ignatieff Eyebrows' to the media. I don't know if John Ivison was trying to strike an Iggy pose, but he looked more like Khrushchev.

Contrast that to Harper already limiting media access.

Michael Ignatieff is also going after Harper's poor fiscal record, spending us into deficit long before the recession even started. That's what he needs to do. Let Harper continue his personal attacks and coalition bogeyman campaign. Frankly, he's starting to sound like a comic book character and it's grating on people's nerves. Shazam.

The Globe also reminds voters: Let’s not make Ignatieff a personal issue

Personal attacks on Mr. Ignatieff have been the preferred tactic of his political opponents from the moment he entered political life after a distinguished career as a human-rights theorist, writer and academic. These attacks have benefited from an unfortunate national prejudice that views success abroad with suspicion or, in its extreme form, contempt. He is indeed an extraordinary Canadian.

He was listed as one of the world’s 100 leading public intellectuals by Foreign Policy for his thinking on the “tension between security and human rights, the fight against modern terrorism and the philosophy of freedom.” (That quote is taken from the citation of one of his 11 honorary degrees.) His books have received many awards, including the Governor-General’s Award for Literature and the George Orwell Prize, and one was short-listed for the Booker Prize.

The American philosopher Francis Fukuyama called Mr. Ignatieff’s Lionel Gelber Prize-winning book, Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism, “a marvellous work that shows the diversity, complexity, agonies and horrors of nationalism with greater depth and insight than most, if not all, academic treatises.” He has written for The New Yorker, hosted programs for the BBC, and has held teaching positions at Cambridge, the University of London and Harvard.

Time to bring back the smart.

Want Some Cool Stuff For Your Campaigns and Rallies?

UnseatHarper has some really great items for your local campaigns and rallies. T-shirts, lawn signs, bumber stickers. You name it, they've got it. Be sure to check them out.

And you can download free flyers here.

Jason Lietaer and Stephen Harper's Tea Party Campaign Not Going so Well

I watched Power and Politics yesterday, something I haven't done in quite awhile, and despite the fact that the whole 'reckless coalition' mantra is tanking, Harper's communication point man, Jason Lietaer, suggested that it would continue to be at the center of their campaign.

A big mistake.

It took just two days for the media, with the help of Gilles Duceppe, to nullify. Stephen Harper did indeed try to become Prime Minister in 2004, with the full support of the Bloc. Duceppe is far more credible on this because he not only has the original letter, but also video and Tom Flanagan's book. It's time to move on.

This only validates what Harper's critics have said all along. That he is deceitful.

It took a lot of courage for Duceppe to go public with this, because across Quebec people are saying "you've get to get rid of Harper", so admitting that he was once prepared to be kingmaker for him is a risky move. It's also interesting that Jack Layton is stepping away from it, despite the fact that he was key to both coalitions, and instead is allowing Michael Ignatieff to shoulder all of the "blame".

But I don't want to talk about the "C" word because it's enough already. On the weekend Gilles Duceppe referred to Stephen Harper's Tories 'as a retrograde Tea Party', and I think that's one of the things the other parties should focus on.

Not only on Harper's long and deep connections with the Republican Tea Party, but his style of campaigning. Stick to a few talking points and hammer them home. This might work in the U.S. where their battle cry is "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness", but in Canada, we follow the creed of "Peace, Order and Good Government".

In his five years, Harper has made no attempt to be peaceful, orderly or to provide good government. Instead it has been just a never ending election campaign, much of it at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer. His caucus rarely answer questions in the House, preferring to be glib and stick to their scripts. They have a 200 page manual instructing them on how to make committees dysfunctional, to avoid accountability. And they have a vetting system for handling access to information, that would rival Joseph Goebbel's.

So pitting himself against the other parties in such a manner, only validates what his critics have said all along. That he is impossible to deal with. I also found his choice of those to lead his campaign interesting. Guy Girorno, a corporate lobbyist, who once choreographed Ontario Premier Mike Harris's every move, and Jason Lietaer, another lobbyist and Mike Harris top aide.

It was once thought that Lietaer might replace Kory Teneycke as what Kady O'Malley called Director of Uncomfortable Silences. Even Jane Taber, top Harper cheerleader, listed him as one of the lobbyists in Harper's revolving door.

Which only validates what Harper's critics have said all along. That his government is run by corporate lobbyists.

This brings me to the second talking point of this campaign. That "only Stephen Harper can lead us to economic stability". They cite the fact that we did better than most countries during the collapse, despite the fact that many in the financial world agree that it was only because of measures put in place by the former government, many of which have since been torn down by Harper and Co. However, it would appear that our economic prowess was only in the short term. Many other countries are now leaving us in their dust.

That could have something to do with the fact that we were the only ones who saw the need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on "aren't we doing a great job" ads and signs, instead of focusing on the actual economic strength of recovery.

The Montreal Gazette gives us a Reality 'cheque': Harper's claims on the economy

- Canada's economy has been improving, but not at the same rate as the leading economies. Australia and Sweden are expected to lead in economic improvement in 2011, according to the report

- "Any likely post-election government can also be expected to stay on a course aimed at deficit reduction, with only the specific mix of spending and tax policy priorities under real debate."

- The Harper government increased program spending faster than the inflation rate. Between 2006-07 and 2008-09, program spending increased by an annual average of 5.1 per cent.

And the suggestion that only Stephen Harper can handle the economy, and not the Conservatives, validates yet another criticism, and perhaps the most important of them all.

Stephen Harper is a government on one. He listens to no one, not even the Canadian people.

It took just two days to tear down the entire Conservative strategy. They'd better change the channel soon because they've still got a long way to go.

To John Snobelen: If the Bloc are Traitors, Why Was Stephen Harper Sleeping With the Enemy? Twice!

John Snobelen has a rather silly column in the Sun, in which he refers to the Bloc Party as traitors.

For those who don't know, Snobelen was in the Mike Harris government (talk about your traitors), and though he dropped out of school in grade eleven, was his Minister of Education.

As the country is now waking up to the fact that Stephen Harper was in a full coalition agreement with the Bloc in 2004, there is another interesting item from the Winnipeg Free Fress, May 14, 2005. At the time, Stephen Harper was still "using" them to defeat Paul Martin: "Meanwhile an Ipsos Reid poll suggested the Liberals could be headed toward defeat if the Tories and Bloc succeed in toppling the government next week."

I think Duceppe is getting tired of Harper's "booty calls". He has to state whether or not they are in "a committed relationship" or he's through.

Harper, above, speaks to news media outside Commons after the Conservatives again forced early adjournment. At left the mace, symbol of Parliament's authority, sits beside Calendar showing Friday the 13th.

Stephen Harper Says Israeli Government is Illegitimate

It's refreshing that the media is finally beginning to denounce Harper's fear mongering about a coalition, in part by disputing his claims that he himself never entered into such a deal. Sticking to his lie, will only further diminish trust in him.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's speeches in the early days of the federal election campaign could give Canadians the shivers. Harper paints a dire picture of war and financial calamity around the world, a teetering Canadian economy, and what he says is the "terrible price to pay" if the three opposition parties banding together to usurp a Conservative minority. Harper opened the second day of his campaign Sunday once again sounding the alarm that his rivals were bent on overthrowing a future Conservative minority.

He claims that he is the only one who can present a stable government. But how stable is it, when he shuts down Parliament twice for self interest, and refuses to present the costs of bills he expects our elected officials to approve of?

The only thing that saved us during the last financial crisis was measures put in place by the last Liberal government, after they cleaned up Brian Mulroney's mess. But since then Harper and Flaherty have deregulated our banking industry, making it more difficult to survive another economic crisis. How stable is that?

He operates in total secrecy, where his word, and his word only is law. How stable is that?

I thought it might be fun though, to bring up the last election in Israel. Harper told the British Press that Losers shouldn't get to form coalitions.

Yet in Israel, where Benjamin Netanyahu is now prime minister, their government is made up of a coalition of 'losers'. Are they illegitimate? Dangerous? Unstable?

This feeling that he alone can guide us, is rather narcissistic. He hasn't been doing much of a job so far.

Stephen Harper May be Barred From Running Again

An interesting article about the Contempt of Parliament charges. I knew it was a crime but wasn't aware of the implications. Parliamentary law bars Harper from re-election. He must step down and a new leader chosen.

On Friday March 25, 2011 the Canadian House of Commons found Prime Minister Stephen Harper guilty of contempt of Parliament. According to parliamentary law, contempt of parliament is a federal crime. Being that Harper has been found guilty of a crime Harper is barred from seeking re-election on May 2, 2011. No federal government or cabinet minister has ever been found in contempt before. The vote by the Canadian House of Commons is very much the same as an impeachment of the president of the United States of America.

In the US if a president or US lawmaker is impeached (a formal process in which an official is accused of unlawful activity) that person is removed from office and cannot run for office again. Richard Nixon avoided a vote of impeachment by resigning as president. Harper was essentially impeached from the government of Canada for the federal crime of contempt of Parliament. As a direct result of the House of Commons vote the Harper government was dissolved. As Stephen Harper was found guilty of unlawful activities he is no longer deemed to be the Prime Minister of Canada and an election was called to chose a new leader.

This is huge. I've got a book on the rules of Parliament, I'm going to see if I can find something. Harper has been impeached. How about that?

New York Times: Canadian Government, Beset by Scandal, Collapses

The New York Times may have the most honest headline yet. However, the Harper government fell not only because of scandals, but for something as fundamental as contempt of Parliament.

He fails to understand that under our Parliamentary system, he has to abide by the will of Parliament. They are our representatives.

If he refuses to respect that, it means that he refuses to respect us.

I watched his press conference from this morning (taped) and he's off his game.

He was doing fine when he could stick to script, but when the media hammered him about his 2004 coalition, that his then campaign manager, Tom Flanagan, confirmed included the full support of the Bloc, he fumbled.

You can always tell when he's lying because his eyes water and his jaw looks like it's about to snap.

I think the media may have a bit of fun. For five years he's refused to answer questions, and the RCMP threatened anyone who dared to challenge that.

But Harper looked like a lonely man. His government of one, on a campaign of one.

Maybe it's time he got back in the bubble.

If "Losers" Can't Form a Government, What is Harper Doing There?

When Stephen Harper was in London he made the claim 'Losers don’t get to form coalitions'. Little Janie Taber drooled.

Unfortunately, Harper's own coalition of 'losers' aside, he clearly is either ignorant of, or intentionally disdainful of, the Canadian parliamentary system. All 308 Members of Parliament are 'winners', elected by the Canadian people.

Harper is simply an elected Member of Parliament, along with the other 307 elected Members of Parliament. In the 'first past the post' system, as leader of the party with the most seats, he got to form a government. The fact that his party didn't get the 'majority' of seats, by his definition, makes them 'losers'.

Government is independent of Parliament, and the main role of Parliament is to make the government accountable to the citizens. They can't do that unless the government is honest and open with them.

Contempt for Parliament can be a national pastime, but CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT is a CRIME.

Stephen Harper has just gone down in history as a "criminal".

It's just that simple.

How Do We Turn Down the Volume on the Right-Wing Noise Machine?

Last night my husband and I went out to dinner to celebrate our anniversary. At a nearby table a customer was discussing the upcoming election, clearly upset that the Opposition had "rejected the budget", seeing it as a "power grab".

My initial knee-jerk reaction was dismay that they had missed the enormity of what had taken place yesterday. The Contempt of Parliament charge is the first in the history of the British Parliamentary system.

It had nothing to do with the budget or grabbing power, and everything to do with stopping a man who believes that he is above the law, and not only has contempt of, but contempt for, our time-honoured traditions, and the people we elect to represent us.

In his brief statement, made after the historic vote, Stephen Harper claimed that the opposition should be focusing on the economy, not an election, but how can they focus on the economy, when he refused to provide the cost of bills he's trying to get passed?

His appearance was only to provide talking points for the right-wing noise machine. And our waitress didn't disappoint. Her parting shot to the misguided couple - "I know. And what's he going to do if he doesn't win .... go back to Harvard?"

What does that mean exactly? The fact that Michael Ignatieff has an opportunity to return to teaching at Harvard, is a bad thing? And why not Oxford or Cambridge, where he also taught?

And what will Stephen Harper do if he loses, or fails to get a majority? Go back to the corporate sponsored Astro-Turf National Citizens Coalition? If your best argument is that the leader of the official opposition may return to teaching at Ivy League universities, then it's time to rethink your arguments.

The sad thing is, however, that the media will also use the same banal talking points. During the Coalition Crisis, few thought to investigate whether or not the accusations of a coalition being "illegal" or "dangerous" were accurate. And fewer still reminded Canadians that Stephen Harper himself had engineered a Coalition in 2004, to take down Paul Martin at the Throne Speech. I'm glad some are now producing the letter of intent, to neutralize another Conservative talking point: "The Michael Ignatieff led coalition".

That was a very sad time in our history, because it exposed our ignorance of how our country is supposed to be governed. Instead Jack Layton, Stéphane Dion and Gilles Duceppe, were dubbed the "Three Stooges" by the mainstream press, and reduced to "bumbling" status.

Jack Layton has a PhD in political science and an amazing team. Libby Davies, Pat Martin, Charlie Angus and Paul Dewar, to name just a few. None "hapless" or "ignorant" or "dangerous".

Stéphane Dion is a brilliant academic who wrote the 'Clarity Act' and proved his leadership skills when he stood his ground at an International summit to pass the Kyoto Accord. The Conservatives were able to paint him as ignorant, by capitalizing on his difficulty with the English language. But he is not "hapless" or "ignorant" or "dangerous", either. In fact many Quebecers claim that Dion's English was no worse than Harper's French.

And Gilles Duceppe, was never part of the Coalition in 2008 (though a full partner in Harper's in 2004). He only agreed to support it for 18 months on confidence issues. I have so much respect for Mr. Duceppe. A true progressive with a poet's soul. And yes, he's a separatist, but so was Stephen Harper, when he wanted Alberta to go it alone. And *Stockwell Days' father was actually a candidate for the Western Canada Concept Party, who were also separatists.

But once your name gets fed into the right-wing noise machine, it gets spit out as garbly-goop.

The author of the book shown above, David Cameron, knows a thing or two about the right-wing media and noise machines.

He was once editor of the American Spectator magazine, and responsible for fabricating one scandal after another, to support the Right's attempt to have former President Bill Clinton impeached. Financed by the Federalist Society and the Council for National Policy, Cameron would later come clean about his own involvement in the ungrounded assault.

For a bit of trivia, it was at the CNP annual conference in 1997, where they passed the motion to throw all of their resources behind having Clinton impeached. And it was at this same conference, where Stephen Harper gave his 'I really hate Canadians' speech, saying that their "conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world."

And in another bit of trivia, not that either of these things would ever find their way onto a Canadian trivia show; one of the people responsible for the Clinton fiasco, was the late Paul Weyrich.

Weyrich was once the Godfather of the American Religious Right, but he was also instrumental in helping to get Stephen Harper elected in 2006, when he advised his "flock" not to talk to the Canadian media, who were curious about our fallen PM's involvement in their movement .

So how do we turn off, or turn down, the right-wing noise machine, that is clearly deafening society to the erosion of their democracy?

Cameron started an organization called Media Matters in America, where he exposes the lies and half-truths, of many headline grabbing news stories.

In Canada, we have many concerned citizen movements including UnseatHarper/Defend Democracy, that I am proud to write for. Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, Catch 22 Harper Conservatives, leadnow.ca, CoffeeParty.ca ....

And collectively our voices will be used to drown out the noise.

Can you hear it?

The grinding and clunk of the right-wing noise machine as its motor burns out, replaced with the melody of millions of small voices speaking up for democracy.

Music to my ears.

Footnotes:

* Stockwell Day, Sr., was long associated with the Social Credit Party of Canada. In the 1972 federal election he was the Social Credit candidate running against New Democratic Party leader Tommy Douglas in the riding of Nanaimo—Cowichan—The Islands. Day, Sr., supported Doug Christie and was a member of the Western Canada Concept.

Ding, Dong, Our Dictator's Gone. La, la, la, la, la

Soon folks soon. And remember this man did not fall on his budget, which was a hoax. He fell because of unprecedented Contempt for Parliament charges. The media had better get with the program and not allow him to play the victim.

He has no one to blame but himself.

The Global economy will be weakened for decades, and since when is he responsible for the global economy? He's made a mess of ours with his ads and signs and pork barrelling.

Enough already.

We have stripped him of his powers. Yeah!!!!

Stephen Harper Has Gone Full Circle and Faith in Him is Fading Fast

A member of Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper has been sharing some wonderful old news clippings, and I found the one above quite relevant to today. In it former Sun Media columnist, Greg Weston, predicts an easy victory for the Liberals and the end of Stephen Harper's political career.

This was the fall of 2005, just months before the election that brought Harper to power, proving that columnists and pollsters know very little about how Canadians think.

There is an opinion piece in the Globe today, written by Harvey Schachter, who reminds us of the 1987 Ontario election, when Bob Rae managed an upset to become Premier of Ontario with a majority of seats. No one could have predicted that. Says Schachter: "Public opinion polls are really measures of public sentiment, not more deeply held opinions for the all-important uncommitted voters, and can change dramatically when an election is called."

Some comments from Greg Weston in September of 2005, when he thought he could predict how voters were feeling:

"recent polls show the ruling Liberals have regained a significant lead over the Conservatives, with support for the two parties essentially back to where they were last election day."

"Harper didn't exactly raise spirits at last week's retreat with a call to arms for a possible fall election the Conservatives currently have little hope of winning."

"if the polls are any indication, Canadians were underwhelmed by Harper's appearances ..."

"even Harper's most ardent devotees have apparently accepted the harsh reality that no matter how they dress up the boss, no matter how clever the sales pitch, most voters just aren't buying."

Any of this sound familiar? Different opposition leader but the same dire predictions.

Weston did have Harper pegged correctly though:

Only months before the next federal election, the opposition leader's office is a mess, with disillusioned advisers heading for the exits in droves. The Conservatives' all-important communications shop, for example, lost all but one of its experienced pros in a mere matter of weeks this summer.

Some of them have told me the problem is Harper tries to micro-manage all aspects of his organization — and obviously can't. Compounding the problem is a small coterie of longtime sycophants whose personal loyalty to Harper is evidently far more important to him than their professional performance.

The result is an insular control freak surrounded by a few fellow bunker dwellers ignoring the advice of more capable and experienced staffers who inevitably leave in frustration. If a leader is judged by those around him, Harper is certainly the architect of many of his own problems.

Harper still micro-manages everything and when he falls, he will be "the architect" of his own demise. With mounting scandals, it will be impossible for him to distance himself from them, given that his fingerprints are on EVERYTHING his government and caucus does.

And just as Greg Weston failed to predict the outcome of that election, he also failed to understand just how vindictive Stephen Harper is. Weston was fired from Sun Media for exposing the "fake lake" story in the lead up to the G-20.

Many pundits are suggesting that there is no populace movement to oust Harper, so he will probably be given another mandate, possibly even a majority.

Silly them. They need to get out more.

Why Are the Conservatives Giving Gun Owners $21 Million? Is Harper Going Back to His Roots?

Craig Chandler is a controversial figure at best, but has been instrumental in the rise of Stephen Harper and the Reform movement.

You might call him right-wing fringe, but when he ran to lead the old PC Party, as part of the right's bid to take it over, he launched a rather, shall we say interesting, campaign.

Few took fringe candidate Craig Chandler seriously when he ran for the federal Progressive Conservative leadership this spring. Even harder to take is the fundraiser he plans to help cover the cost of his failed bid. Chandler is inviting guests to a Calgary shooting range to fire live ammunition at targets emblazoned with the federal Liberal party logo."For 100 bucks, you get a 9-mm or equivalent, bullets, and you get a day pass at the Shooting Edge (firing range) and you get a steak dinner – Alberta beef, of course," he says.

The idea makes Calgary West Alliance MP Rob Anders "giddy.""It’s a perfect fit for an Alliance fundraiser," the MP says. "I can’t picture NDPs or Liberals doing it." (Chandler’s fundraiser criticized, By Jon Forest, The Toronto Star, July 8, 2003)

Cheryl Gallant has twittered (from Cowboys for Social Responsibility) that the budget provides $21 million dollars to gun owners, a rather odd allocation of funds for a party that is supposed to be worried about our economy (The RCMP wanted less than a million but were turned down).

Stephen Harper's success since 2006, has been primarily because he attempted to pose as a moderate. But that facade is crumbling, because his actions are pretty radical. However, when the Reform-Alliance was getting started, they drew much of their support from the radical right, a group they have since tried to distance themselves from, at least publicly.

A recent NANOS poll suggests that Canadians are beginning to lose trust in the Conservatives, and there is at least one group calling for a leadership revue.

My fear is that this election, Harper will go back to his "base" to garner the needed supported. This means all of the radical gun lovers and religious extremists, who were there in the beginning, and may be up for a new campaign.

And what will he promise them? The same thing he promised them several years ago. An end to women's rights, gay rights, immigration, multiculturalism. Everything that defines us a nation.

If there was ever a time for progressives to unite for a common cause it is now. Those of us familiar with the early days of Reform, know just how nasty they can be. Selling bullets to shoot at the Liberal logo, will be mild in comparison.

Stephen Harper is afraid, and when he gets afraid he is like a trapped animal.

I have to be honest, I'm a little frightened. And that's not fear-mongering. The $21 million promised above, says a lot. He's reaching out to the wrong crowd. Notice Gallant specifically mentions 'sports shooters', not the usual plea for 'farmers' needing guns.

Conservatives Have no Plan to Balance Books. Liberals Have Already Proven That They Can

The Conservatives are hoping to campaign on the budget, but they may have a problem. The Financial Post has already given it the thumbs down and CARP, the premier Seniors organization agrees.

In true Conservative fashion, Julian Fantino is attacking the seniors. That should get him far.

The budget provides no plan to eliminate the deficit and balance the books. The Liberals cleaned up Brian Mulroney's mess and left this government with a $13 billion surplus, which they blew well before the economic crisis.

If you can still read Jane Taber without wanting to hurl, she writes that Michael Ignatieff is on fire, with only a few digs at the Liberals. I read the piece because of the heading. When I caught the snide remarks I looked at who wrote it, and admit that I didn't finish.

There are rumours that Harper may go to the Governor General to dissolve Parliament before he has to face contempt charges. That will make three times that he's "cut and run". What a coward.

Stephen Harper Not a God After All. Just a Frightened Politician

Something huge is taking place in Canada. Our media is no longer afraid of Stephen Harper. For five years he controlled them. Refusing to answer questions unless presented in advance.

But recent scandals and the unprecedented Contempt of Parliament charges, have weakened his hold on power. He no longer incites fear. Instead he is now the one who shows fear.

When he suggested at a press conference that the economy was too fragile for an election, his empty words fell on deaf ears. Our wonderful media shouted questions at him and no RCMP beat them up. No threats from Dimitri Soudas to ruin their careers.

We need to mark this moment. It's pivotal.

Even the Senate is rejecting this government's secrecy, giving the power back to Parliament.

And the good news, no more tax dollars going to self-promotion ads. They've had to pull them back.

Alice Klein is elated:

The timing drama is over and the spring election is definitely on. Thank goodness. I am one Canadian who couldn’t be happier to see an end to the Stephen Harper government’s giant f*&*-you to the values of the majority of Canadians. I’m sorry, but strong language is called for. I am not talking about a government that has won a mandate to radically reengineer the social fabric. That would be terrible, but I couldn’t cry about democracy.

Two-thirds (63 per cent) of all voters voted against Harper and his Conservative party. Election results don’t lie. But the Harper government does. Oh, pardon me – evades, misinforms, denies, twists out of shape.

Spring is in the air and an election around the corner. Stephen Harper has been reduced to just another politician. His crown tarnished. His days numbered.

Life is good.