Election Tampering! MAYBE!

Elections can get ugly and in the last election it was apparently especially ugly. With constant amount of evidence showing that people in many ridings were called to lie about a polling station change. If it can be proven that enough people were disenfranchised from voting in a riding there can be by-election. Now I can't say that all the allegations are true, because I always maintain the "innocent till proven guilty" approach, but I think that if it can be proven and if enough By elections are held it can be possible that the Conservatives will lose seats.

there are enough ridings that it could be possible (important word possible) that the Conservatives if by-elections are called could lose the 12 or more seats which would mean Harper would lose his majority. Now this is very out there and I won't hold my breath for this to happen, but even with the odds very low I still think it is entirely possible that Harper could lose some seats. 

Spending Billions On........

Peter Mckay affirmed that his government will buy the F-35 fighter jets. Peter Mckay stated that his government won't spend a penny more then they are suppose to. We are of course suppose to trust this, even though the cost of the fighter jets went from 18 billion to 30 billion (a 12 billion dollar difference, Hey that enough money to completely fund a national child care program). But my favorite line of his speech is this one.

"And we will give our air men and women the best available aircraft, which I believe is the fifth-generation, F-35 Lightning II."

And to that I show this video of Rick Mercer explaining the falsehood of that statement.

 So we are wasting 30 billion on these fighter jets when we could be using the money to actually make the Canadian economy stronger, our health care system better, tuition fees lower!

Read more here

Republicans No Fiscal Conservatives

According to the independent committee for responsible federal budget most Republican candidates aren't at all fiscally responsible. In fact 3 out of the 4 Republicans would increase the debt over the next ten years.

The worst on the budget is Newt Gingrich according to the report he would increase the debt by 7 trillion in nine years and make the Debt to GDP ratio 114%. Rick Santorum wins second place on the worst fiscal conservative by adding 4 trillion to the debt in nine years bringing the Debt to GDP to 104%. Mitt Romney had some credibility, because his old plan would have increase the debt by only 250 billion in nine years, that on average 28 billion a year. that way below the current projection of a 500-600 billion dollar deficit per year, but most recently if you add Romney new tax plan he just talked about a few days ago he would add 2.5 trillion to the debt in nine years. He's kind of like Harper promise a small deficit first then show up with a bigger deficit. But the best plan (at least for the deficit) would be Ron Paul his plan according to the study would reduce 2.2 trillion in debt over 9 years. The only problem, rather one of the problems with Ron Paul's plan is the fact that in the process of eliminating a bunch of government agencies and some economist say eliminate up to 1.5 million jobs in the process. All of these Republicans would cut spending on essential programs for the poor and the elderly and all of them would then take that money and reduce taxes on the rich who don't need anymore money and some to the middle class. Even with small tax cuts for the middle class they would still be worse off, because a lot of the agencies that help them would be cut harsh like Medicare or even be completely dismantled.

Mitt, Rick and Newt are lying when they call themselves fiscally responsible, and Ron although would cut defense his other policies would take the U.S back into recession. In fact all these candidates would put the middle class and the poor back into recession.   

Read More Here

What A Surprise!!

The Conservatives never seem to stop amazing me on how much hypocrisy is in their government. When the gun registry was being battled in the house of commons one of the main arguments was that the gun registry was inefficient and was a waste of money. Considering the gun registry only cost 2 million dollars (about the same amount of money as that fake lake) this argument doesn't hold water. But Vic Toes is proposing 80 million dollars of money to go towards surveying what we do on the internet.

C-30, a bill to update Canadian law when it comes to crimes committed online, will cost $20 million a year for the first four years and $6.7 million a year after that, Public Safety Canada told the CBC's Hannah Thibedeau on Wednesday.

So let me get this straight a gun registry which police have said helps them against crime that cost 2 million is wasteful, but a 80 million dollar program with a 6.7 million dollar running cost to spy on us is just fine. The Conservatives are continuing to show that they aren't smart on crime!

R is for Romney and Rick Santorum

Romney released his tax returns only to show us that he makes a lot of money and is taxed at a rate 15.4% the lowest rate is 15%! Now this was of no surprise to some. It only show the enormous amount of money the U.S  could be getting to reduce the deficit if they actually taxed the rich at the current low rate it is. Because to pay the same tax rate as a guy earning minimum wage is absurd. Rick Santorum who has recently came on his white horse to apparently "save" the Republican party and trys to show himself as the guy who is most like you is also a millionaire. Nothing wrong with that except the fact that he pays at most 28.5% of his income to taxes. The current rate for the rick which Santorum is should be paying 35%. Now I don't blame these men for using the loopholes at their disposal to pay as little income tax as possible. I blame our government and the organization who lobby the U.S government into making the tax rate what it is now with all the loopholes. Now I get that there are tax reduction, but sometimes the rich have got to pay taxes.

And So Goes the Base!

Romney in 2008 had one very strong allies. That ally was his home state called Michigan he won it by 9%. Granted it wasn't a complete landslide, but it was one of the only states he did win. Which means that in a race where Romney is the front runner one would assume Michigan would be in the solid block of Romney support. But with new polls showing Santorum  with a 9 point lead and with recent events of other solid Romney states (from 2008) like Minnesota and Colorado going for Santorum. I think Romney is shaking in his boots. So it seems Romney's base has left him. Romney up till now I believed was always the front runner. Even after he lost South Carolina then Minnesota and Colorado. At this moment I think Romney is no longer the front runner at all.

Why Now?
well first until after a little while it seemed Romney won Iowa, but when Rick Santorum ended up winning it meant little to nothing, because Santorum was doing bad in all the other states. When Gingrich won South Carolina and was at the time poised to win Florida, I still believed Romney was the front runner, because first South Carolina and the south has never really been Romney's friend and more importantly even if Gingrich won Florida the next few states at that time were apparently solid for Romney. Now Romney isn't the Front Runner, because he is losing states he won in 2008 and I would consider his base.Romney is no longer the front runner. At this moment He is the strong second. If I learned anything in this primary season nothing is carved in stone.

Heck Trudeau Your Right!

I think people are over doing this statement. First of all speaking as someone from Quebec, we are much more left wing then most provinces, and when Trudeau made the comment that he would think more about a independent Quebec if Canada becomes Harper's Canada is quite frankly for me when I first heard it funny. In Quebec we aren't as right wing as Harper in fact we are very anti Harper, there is no doubt about that. So to say you would be open to an independent left wing Quebec rather than Harper was for me funny.

"I always say that if ever I believed Canada was really Stephen Harper's Canada — that we were heading against abortion, against gay marriage, that we were going backwards 10,000 different ways — maybe I would think about wanting to make Quebec a country."

 I didn't think of it as scandalous at all I found its funny! It's obviously not true that Trudeau wants to separate and nor do I want to separate, but it shows the level of hatred many Progressives have to Harper's policy. I think it's a joke and for the media to pester him about this. I mean really! their making a mountain out of an ant hill.  

Our Record!

In Canada thanks to Stephen Harper we are again discredited to the world. Since budget cuts to scientific research on the ozone many scientist in the U.S are saying that this will jeopardize Ozone research.

"It's unthinkable that data collection is beginning to shut down in this vast country."Anne Thompson, a professor of meteorology at Penn State University, said in a release

They point out Canada has been a world leader in keeping an eye on the ozone layer.

 The key word in this sentence is "has." Canada Has Been A World Leader on climate change. Canada Has Been A World Leader on Research, Canada Has Been A World Leader on Statistics, Canada Has Been A World Leader on many things, but under Harper our legacy is quickly being tarnished. Throwout the world our country is losing it's stance.We must change this.

Read More Here

The Long RUN!

Well Romney, Rick , Gingrich and Paul congratulations you have now become Obama-Hillary. AT least I think so. I think this is going to go much further than super Tuesday. Why

1. States that I though were safe for Mitt were not.After Florida I thought it would have been a clear path for Mitt, but when states like Colorado and Minnesota, which voted for Romney outstandingly in 2008 start to vote for Rick Santorum I think this race could take a while.

2. In 2008 after super Tuesday McCain was so far ahead there was no way he was going to lose. In this primary although still relatively early I think the states in the (united states) are going to split. Even on super Tuesday.

3. No one is leaving. Gingrinch looks like he wants to go all the way, Romney the front-runner (at least I think for now), Santorum is on an upswing and Paul in 2008 stayed in the race even after McCain secured the nomination.

Maine Votes and I have No IDEA!

Today Maine votes for which candidate they want to run against Obama. Now I would try and guess where these states would Go, but There aren't any recent polls. The last poll was in October (which is a lifetime ago) it still has Bachman , Perry, John Huntsman and Herman Cain!

The leader in the last poll was Hermain Cain with 29% Romney in second with 24%. So that's no help. I tried to look at the 2008 results. Romney won 52% McCain in second way down at 20%. So one might say okay Romney won, but with Colorado in 2008 a state that voted for Romney with 60% then just some days ago vote for Santorum puts a lot of doubt in predicting Romney a win.

But here is one thing I will predict. In all the contest so far in this race Ron Paul got a stronger share of the vote then he did in 2008. That means that since in 2008 Ron got 18% it wouldn't be too far of a stretch to say he would get higher then that. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Ron get's a strong second or even wins the state. Then again I can't back this up with anything due to the lack of information. 

Tax Sugar!

Some U.S researchers are calling Sugar a toxic substance that needs to be taxed. Now I am all for taxing sugar  as well as soda drinks and then putting that money either at reducing the deficit or putting into Health Care. I don't like saying that sugar is toxic. Everything CAN BE TOXIC in a certain concentration. Paracelsus stated "the dose makes the poison." So all substances can be toxic if you have too much, but we tax substances like Alcohol and tobacco, because the government has to then provide the money for the health problems they have later . I think that since sugar is linked to obesity and a lot of money is put into providing health care for people who are obese it would only make sense to tax this substance to pay for the amount of money is needed to provide health care for them. Rather then continuing to allow the straining of our health care system .Now I don't think that people should just be taxed without being given an alternative. Like a carbon tax taxing companies we should also provide clean renewable energy for them to shift to. More local farming and and reduce the amount of sugar in food are alternatives our government must look into. We need a food revolution to make healthy food the economical choice for families. We need to always try and make good healthy food less expensive so that if people who want to buy healthy food can always.