At least we know Harper isn't lighting up..

A few days ago, I went to see the Prime Minister speak. He really is a very good speaker, although I wouldn't necessarily label him your typical politician. Labelled everything from "Mr. Mean" to someone who "eats babies" by those on the blissfully uninformed left, he clearly isn't appealing to all Canadians on a charismatic level. Granted, "Mr. Mean" and "Baby-Eater" aren't very intelligent, well-informed or even funny names to call him, but that's to be expected. He told the National Post: "I am not in politics to be loved, I'm in politics to get things done and make a difference." To date, he certainly isn't very 'loved,' but conversely he really hasn't made much of a difference, either.

The problem with a minority government is that the citizens can never completely hold their government accountable. No, Harper hasn't lived up to all of his promises that he made, pre-PM standing. But he hasn't had the resources or support to do so, leading the country with a Conservative minority government. This form of government, in my opinion, is unfair to everyone. No one wins. It's unfair to full-out criticize Harper for not doing what he said he would, and it's unfair for us to not be able to full-out criticize Harper for not doing what he said he would. The citizens of Canada should be able to hold their government completely accountable, and the government of Canada should be able to do everything possible to lead and improve the country.

Sadly, my prediction is that, post-October 14th, we may end up with another Conservative minority government. We're currently leading in the polls, but not with more than 50%. We can safely say, I think, that the NDP or Green Party isn't going to take it, and come on, Stefan Dion? I mean really, I felt BAD for the Liberals when he got voted into leadership. And I don't often feel genuinely bad for the Liberals.

The way I see it, we're sort of at a pause in improvement as far as Canada goes. Unfortunately, the state of the country is worsening much more quickly. I'm really hoping that people smarten up and strategically vote Conservative in this election, if only to have some real (positive) changes in Canada in our time. But I'm not keeping my fingers crossed on the hopes of anyone "strategically" voting Conservative.

Another thing is that I feel there is a HUGE issue that should be discussed this election, but NOBODY IS MANNING UP TO IT. Freedom of Expression? Freedon of Speech? Our very rights are being forcibly stripped from us, and no federal politicians are even going near the issue. Obviously they'll lose a big chunk of the "minority" vote if they do.. But if the Conservatives took a more Libertarian approach to government, if only in terms of that issue, no question they would get a lot more "undecided" votes. Not only is Libertarianism kind of trendy right now, but these issues are EXTREMELY important to our Charter-given rights and freedoms, and more and more people are beginning to recognize that. Harper has already admitted that his party is leaning more to the left than usual, in order to satisfy the preference of more Canadians, so why not at least MENTION this huge elephant in the room?!

Here's a little more of what he told the NP:

.....
"I said for a long time, and nobody listened to me for the longest time, that my goal was to make conservatism the natural governing philosophy of the country. At that time we didn't have a single Conservative party. That's what I set out to do. Now, two things have to happen -- firstly, conservatives had to get our act together, which we did. The second thing that has to happen is we have to engage in a dialogue with Canadians. That means on some things moving the party to the centre. I think we're doing that. When I look back to where we were 20 years ago in politics, the basic precept of market economy and fiscal responsibility, which are today accepted, were not accepted 20 years ago. What I find amazing in this election, is that the Liberal party, which basically embraced [those principles] in the last decade, has now abandoned them and moved to the NDP position. It's a mystery to me. Also, Canadians accept we need a different way of dealing with criminal justice in this country. That's not to say rehabilitation doesn't have its place but the principle objective of the criminal justice system has to be the protection of law-abiding citizens, their families and their property -- not the criminals. So I think Canadians accept we've been on the wrong track there and we need to get on a different track. I think Canadians are coming around to a different way of approaching national unity. The approach of the Liberal party has been to make Ottawa as powerful and as full of tax dollars as possible, which once again is what my opponent is running on. But look at the last two or three years. When we took office, this country was looking at a third referendum in Quebec and today the sovereigntists don't even want to talk about separation, let alone promote it. We're moving in the right direction there. We also stress the importance of family, through our tax and other policies. I think what we're showing Canadians that family doesn't mean -- it's something that people of faith like -- but it doesn't mean you have a theological agenda. It means you worry about the social fabric of the country. So I think we're moving the country in the right direction and I also think our party is becoming, I wouldn't say centrist, maybe more pragmatic. I've learned this myself. It's great to have well-researched and thought-out policy ideas but you have to go out into society, find out what people want, find out what's going to work and what incremental steps you can take to implement your policies. Grand blueprints that have been done on the blackboard, endorsed by experts with no practical experience in the economy or society, are disastrous. At a time when I shifted my party away from that kind of thinking, the leader of the Opposition has shifted his party toward it. So much the better for us."
.....

Another thing I don't understand is why he's "centralizing" or simply not addressing important issues, and going completely 1984 on others. Many of you may not agree with me on this, but I feel that some of the moves that Harper has made as PM have been very catered to certain interests (most likely his own), and have been moved to the top of the pile of "issues to tackle" when there are other far more important issues when it comes to national unity, safety and well-being.

The one that sticks out in my mind is these ridiculous drug tests at the side of the road. Yes, drugs and alcohol impair one's ability to drive. Shoot them a breathalizer test to see how many beers they downed before they fell behind the wheel? Of course that's a good idea. Pull over someone who is driving the wrong way on the street and take them to the station for a pee test? Sounds good to me. Check to see how bloodshoot someones' eyes are when they're swirving all over the highway? Sure. But leave it up to the discretion of the police officer to implement a mandatory blood test on someone to test for marijuana? That's crazy!

No, I don't want someone who's high off their face crashing into my family's car at midnight. But at the same time, a blood test? What if someone ISN'T high, and the officer just decides to do a random test to up their $$$, and that someone happens to be terribly afraid of needles? That test could have a traumatizing aftermath for that person, not to mention how much of an invasion of privacy it is to be poking and prodding at someone with a needle on request. "But they're allowed to say no to the test!" Yeah, because that looks good on someone's record and pocketbook. Aside from the fact that driving under the influence of marijuana has never been proven to impair one's driving even close to the amount that driving under the influence of alcohol does (how many accidents have you heard of where the driver was high on dope?), pulling someone out of their car and demanding a blood test because they were driving kind of slowly is a complete violation of rights, and is a little too police-state for me.

Of course it isn't a good idea to drive under the influence of anything, and of course this is not me condoning it, but going police state on an issue so miniscule when there are so many more important issues at hand is completely out of line and irresponsible. Allowing people to have their rights taken away for expressing an opinion....not important? Just think, you could have your right to send private e-mails taken away, AND a blood test forcibly demanded of you (OR ELSE) all in one day! That doesn't sound "centralized" or "Conservative" to me.

Aren't there more important things to address here? Why not take those extra tax dollars and extra cops and put them into high-crime areas in Toronto or even downtown Halifax, and have them clean up the streets? Why not put the extra money into fighting the CHRCs?

That being said, Harper still gets my vote because the rest of them are nuts, and aside from that and a few other issues, I do like him. He doesn't lie nearly as much as the other guys--which only supports his not being a typical politician--and he has done some good for Canada, so far. But this whole minority government, not-being-able-to-hold-our-leaders-accountable thing is getting very old, very quickly.