Time to Live a Simpler Life

Maybe Jesus was on to something…

The current economic crisis has started claiming its first victims and each day the signs grow grimmer for our consumeristic way of life. Of course it is the small that fall first; this evidenced in the recent government collapses in Iceland and Latvia as well as the news that GM would be feeding Swedish carmaker Saab to the pecuniary wolves.

Yet as the current uncertainty gives way to a certainty of worse things to come, it is hard ignore the way the superficiality of our the economy is exposed. Everything depends on continued consumption; something we all know is unsustainable, but something we are all unwilling to admit. The scary part is how reliant on this consumption we have become. If people were to stop buying unnecessary items, which ironically enough is also destroying the planet, the job market would dry up and millions of people would be left without work. This sounds like a travesty but I cannot help but see how people like this, including myself, are dependent on frivolity. In the US, each household has an average of 3, count it, 3 TVs. Think how many billions of dollars in revenue would be lost if Americans (and Brits, Canadians, French, Germans…) had, on average, one less TV in their house. TV manufacturers, cable providers, DVD player makers (each of those 3 TVs needs its own dedicated DVD player), video game makers and even the people that make all the parts for those TVs would face massive reductions in revenue and jobs would of course be the moribund currency.

And with apologies to those bible non-enthusiasts, a quote from your favourite book:

"Beware and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions." Luke 12:13-15

Jesus makes a very clear distinction between “life” and “possessions.” What he means is that life is about people, not things. No matter how many TVs we own they will never become a part of our lives the way that friendship, love and our relationships to other people will.

Ultimately what this whole economic crisis is going to come down to, along with other crises such as climate change, is who is willing to make sacrifices and who is going to hold on to their possessions. Regardless of whether one is atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, CEO of a company or assembly-line worker, those that cling to their 3 TVs will go down with the ship. Those that value humanity, morals, knowledge and recognize the adequacy of one TV; they might just make it through.

And now to satisfy those that might not be a big Jesus fan; a quote from a popular beer commercial that some in Canada might remember:

“It’s all about balance.”

Whether you are talking about the balance between spending time with the guys and, well, watch the commercial here, or the sustainability of the world’s resources and quality of life, there is a lot of wisdom in the idea of balance.

All jokes aside, the economic crisis will no doubt have a major effect on the entire world, and it would be naïve to think that it will just be the little guys that will suffer. Everything is connected. Those that value their possessions need to learn that the future will not be about excess. It will be about balance. Just ask Bob. ("Thanks for gettin' me away from all that sex!") If people can learn that a simpler life might be the answer (something that, as always, is easier said than done), this crisis can be turned from black cloud into a silver lining that forces us to change our ways before it is too late.

Maybe Jesus was onto something...

Or maybe it was the beer guys.

Will Grassby

Obamamania

Today's post will be slightly different in that it will be more personal and more rant-like. However, I hope these factors will make it no less enthralling.

As I'm sure many people were aware, American President Barack Obama made his first foreign visit as president to Canada this past Thursday. It was quite the ordeal, and made us feel special again, after Bush's Mexico snub. The rest of the world must be green with envy. The requisite bus trips were planned from the GTA and around the country, and Obama Tees were on sale again. Multiple camera crews milled through the throngs asking people what the day meant to them, and CBC had a couple of hours of coverage, including some stirring images from the quiet, rainy, closed streets before the motorcade arrived. All this attention, even though Obama's schedule barely included time for a wave from his limo into parliament.

I actually made my way to parliament hill shortly after he arrived, but the excitement had mostly died down. There were still some cameras and sign-wavers, but many of the people had dispersed. Still there, however, were the snipers on various roofs around the parliament, which led to a discussion about how many innocent lives would be justified in being taken to protect the president. I fully appreciate the security concerns, and perhaps more so with Obama's unique circumstances. I also appreciate that these people have a job to do, and if there is an imminent threat to the president, then those responsible may have to die quickly. I don't have a problem with the snipers being there, nor was there any indication that they would hastily place anybody in harm's way. It was really more of a rhetorical debate about the circumstances.

My issue with the security came later in the day. We grew tired of waiting outside parliament in the drizzle, so we returned to grab our skates to play some hockey. We ventured across the frozen canal, and made our way to the Sandy Hill rink, only to find it still covered in snow. We decided to try our luck at Jack Purcell, which involved crossing back over the canal. It was when we arrived at Pretoria Bridge that we were informed we would not be allowed to cross until the motorcade had passed, which wouldn’t be for another forty-five minutes. We wouldn’t be allowed to cross anywhere.

Let me set the scene for those of you who are unfamiliar with the ins and outs of Ottawa. The Rideau Canal runs from beside the parliament buildings down to Carleton University. This is about an eight kilometre stretch of the city, with Colonel By Drive following the east side. It was down Colonel By that the president would be travelling to get back to the airport, and therefore the road was closed. To everybody. I can understand keeping vehicular traffic off the street. A man who barely has time to wave can’t be held up by congestion, and I suspect exploding cars have the potential to do more damage that exploding people, even if you are in a bomb-proof limo. But to not let pedestrians cross the street half an hour before he is scheduled to arrive is a little bit ridiculous. Even more so when you consider that the street is eight kilometres long.

We were essentially stuck. The ever helpful police officers snidely suggested we pay for a cab to drive us across on the highway, but we are not in the habit of paying to cross the street, and we took no cash on our hockey excursion. We couldn’t even go home because we lived on the other side of the canal. The people skating on the canal were fine, and there were stairs leading up to the other side of Colonel By from the skateway, but those two lanes were impenetrable. There must have been twelve of us standing beside the road while nobody drove past, held at bay by two grouchy cops. When someone appeared on the other side from the canal, they were quickly attended to and told to stay where they were. (The cop crossed the street to do so.) There was even a police car that drove down the street with a megaphone instructing people to get off their balconies if they overlooked the road, which raised the attention of two cops stationed nearby who wandered towards the site of the people standing quietly on private property to check it out. I would have been tempted to find out what their response would be if I refused to go back inside. I don’t think ‘peacefully enjoying a winter’s afternoon on your balcony’ is a criminal offence.

I reiterate that I understand there are security concerns. I appreciate that they have to take precautionary measures. But I should remind you that this man is driving around in vehicle flown in for the occasion, encased in five inches of military grade armour, among many security specifications. I don’t think the good people living on Echo Drive are likely to be out there with nefarious intentions, and I would like to think that someone would notice a person setting up weapons extensive enough to harm the president. I also think someone with truly evil intentions could simply run back outside as the first cars in the motorcade drove by. Or perhaps those of us waiting to cross around the city could pull out our rocket-launchers just at the right second.

There are going to be security concerns, but you can’t account for everything. Especially in a country like Canada, where his approval rating has topped 80%, and our list of assassinated politicians is two names long in 142 years. Full credit to Obama for squeezing in some time to stroll around the Byward Market and buy a Beavertail and some trinkets, showing his appreciation and comfort in our nation. I suppose a truly clever assailant could have sprinkled some cyanide in with the cinnamon, but Obama was willing to take this risk. However, the Ottawa police were not willing to take the risk of letting citizens cross a major street spanning much of the city up to thirty minutes before the heavily armoured motorcade drove by, nor were they comfortable with people enjoying the presidential view from their balconies. I suppose on the plus side we got to glimpse the outline of his head through the thick tinted glass, but I don’t think that really makes up for the indignity served to the people of Ottawa.

Russel MacDonald

Another One About Buses

Apparently I like to write blogs about buses, with this one following previous discussions on increased safety on the Greyhound and the OC Transpo strike in Ottawa. I think there’s something simple and communal about the bus. Driving from A to B with an evolving flow of strangers getting where they need to be. I haven’t actually taken a bus in months, which had nothing to do with the transit strike, but I guess I just like the idea of them. But I digress.

Today’s post is about the atheist bus ads which have been taking the country by storm (or at least a discussion or two on CBC radio and the odd newspaper article…). For those who haven’t heard, the Freethought Association of Canada has decided to bring an ad campaign that started in Britain over to Canada. They plan to plaster the message: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” on buses across the country. The ads have been approved in Toronto and Calgary, and have begun to appear on TTC vehicles. They have, however, been rejected by Halifax, Ottawa, London, Vancouver, Victoria, and Kelowna. The Halifax Metro has refused to meet with the organization, and London and the British Columbia three have quoted general policy guidelines rejecting ads that “promote or oppose a specific theology or religious ethic, point of view, policy or action.”

In Ottawa it’s a little bit stickier. They have said: “The Advertising Standards section of our contract specifically excludes religious advertising which might be offensive to transit users, so we cannot approve this ad.” This has not stopped them from approving not-yet-released ads for Bus Stop Bible Studies, which quotes scripture and asks ‘big questions.’ It has also not stopped them from plastering pictures of glum pregnant young women ironing, with a slogan suggesting fathers should lock up their daughters because a certain radio station is bringing back the Gods of Rock. (I do not believe in God, therefore I do not believe in Gods of Rock. I find this offensive.)
By including the intangible phrase ‘offensive,’ OC Transpo has left itself room for criticism. Not that the decision in the end is any better than in London or Kelowna, but at least there the intolerance is all-encompassing, and maintains ad space as a way to hock unnecessary junk. Even the founder of Bus Stop Bible Studies is dumbfounded, asking with an Obama-y level cooperation why OC Transpo approved his ads but not the atheist ones. David Harrison asked: “Why would they approve ours and not theirs? If we don’t stand up for (the atheists’) rights, ours will be trampled too.”

I am not going to sit here and spew outrage at OC Transpo’s decision. It was clearly a misguided decision, and likely one that will be overturned. Maybe they’ll even make it a two-fer, and cover up misogyny with discourse. I suspect the Freethought Association would even have been disappointed had the ads not been barred in some cities. Much like PETA’s naked broccoli banned Superbowl ads, they get lots of sympathy and free publicity this way, and will still likely see their message on a number of buses.

Whether or not the ads will strike somebody and make them realize that they don’t actually believe in God and therefore they are atheists (it’s true), the ads have still already accomplished much of what they were attempting to do, which is stir up healthy debate. Most ads are aimed at exploiting people and subtly maintaining a culture of consumerism anyways, so let’s not hold them with too high an esteem. Had the slogan read something like: “God doesn’t exist, you moron,” then I could see some people being upset. But as they stand, they are nothing but an attempt to open debate, and get a rise out of people who take life too seriously. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.

Russel MacDonald

The Caste of the Forgotten

Much is made of the caste system that has existed in India for hundreds of years and the way this very visible form of social stratification goes against the ideals of the “West.” Yet, as is shown in a very saddening and poignant column by Joe Fiorito in today’s Toronto Star, a less visible, yet extremely distressing social schism exists in cities around the world, including Toronto.

The case shown by Fiorito is that of a 62 year old named George who recently died in his socially supported apartment in January. I will not recount the squalid conditions her was living in, but instead I would like to look at a few of the details in the article that stand out to me.

For a whole week after he died he lay on his bed until the smell coming from his room alerted people to the fact something might be amiss. A week. Think for a moment how lonely this man must have been. Think of all the people you would interact with in a week, then think of this man who went a whole week without anyone coming to see him; without anyone wondering where he was. Fiorito says of the apartment: “It was not the smell of death. It was the smell of years of dying.” In many ways George was already dead to the world. He was ignored, cast aside and left to fend for himself, something he was clearly not capable of doing.

How many other people like this are there? How many times have you passed someone on the street who might’ve been someone like George, or even George himself?

This is clearly not an isolated case. There are tens of thousands of people like George. But why is it that those who are least capable of fending for themselves that are often left to do just that? Unfortunately there is only one answer to that question, and it is one not many of us would want to admit. We believe we are more important; that somehow our lives mean more than those who suffer from alcoholism, metal illness or problems known only to themselves.

In the caste system in India, people are organized into social groups by birth and have no opportunity to move up except through reincarnation. It does not matter how talented one is, they are stuck in their caste. Unfair? Yes, but by whose standards?

In the Western world we do not believe in holding people back but in so called virtues such as “free will” and “equality.” Yet there is a very fine line between opportunity and a Darwinian “survival of the fittest” type of society. Do not get me wrong. I am not advocating the Indian caste system, but instead trying to clarify that while the most able of us reach for the stars, we unconsciously step on the dreams of others and often leave them in our dust. So should we forget about our dreams to take care of the weak? I believe it is possible to both dream and take care of those around us, and the beginning is awareness.

As is seen in the case of George, he was left behind in the caste of the forgotten. There were people that could have helped him but, through weaknesses of their own, they did not.

The word society implies things like community and helping others. There are always those that need help and do not get it. Maybe they do not want it or maybe they cannot find it. Like the case of George, thousands of people like this isolate themselves from everyone around them, and according to many, deserve their fate. How often have you heard or even said the words “There’s only so much you can do.”

But why should there be any limit to what we can do? We, as a society, pride ourselves on reaching for the stars and being the best we can be; why should that stop when it concerns helping others, one of the most integral parts of our existence?

Or is it only important to do our best when there is something in it for us?

Will Grassby

A New Chapter for Zimbabwe

Continuing on in the current trent of inaugaurations, todays blog article will look at the situation in Zimbabwe and the hopes that the burdened nation is pinning on their new prime-minister. Morgan Tsvangairai took his oath yesterday in the capital city of Harare as some celebrated in the streets, hoping that this new face will usher in a new era and mark the end of the intense suffering for the people of Zimbabwe.

Not to put a damper on the festivities, for celebrating is probably what is needed most in a country too well known for war, but a report from the BBC today outlines concerns that are metaphorically reinforced by the inauguration ceremony. To quote the BBC report, which can be found here, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband says that “While Morgan Tsvangirai is acknowledging the crowds, behind him is a lurking figure and that figure is President Mugabe, who has tyrannised that country and bought it to its knees.”

Miliband could be speaking both metaphorically or literally in this case because, sure enough, it was none other than President Robert Mugabe who administered the oath and stands in the background; and lurking would not be the wrong word to use. The event was described as “smileless” and Mugabe denied Tsvangirai the opportunity of a national address, which was earlier promised to him.

This in stark contrast to the happenings in Washington just a few weeks ago where President of the United States Barack Obama gave a powerful speech (see The Blog Journalists’ report on this event here.) that was seen around the world. This is one case where democracy would be better served in the hands of less people, as Tsvangirai’s title as Prime Minister is contingent on his sharing of the power with Mugabe’s regime. Mugabe has proved himself a worthless leader, as evidenced by the revocation of his knighthood and several of his honourary degrees from various universities, and until he is truly gone from the picture Zimbabwe will continue to suffer.

However, the inaugauration of Tsvangirai as Prime Minister does have one major similarity to that of Barack Obama’s, and that is the theme of hope. Just as Obama’s inaugauration did not mark the end of the financial crisis or the trials invoked by the Bush regime, it did mark the start of a new era based on hope and vision; something to believe in. Today, this is why the people in Harare should be dancing. Mugabe may not be gone but the illusions he and his followers painted are fading. It will take years to bring Zimbabwe back to where it was in the 1970s and even that will not bring back the hundreds of thousands that have died due to famine and war, but amongst the quotes in the BBC article lie words like “cautiously optimistic”, “step forward” and an overall feeling of equality; another virtue Obama poignantly brought forth.

It was this feeling of equality that Tsvangirai very explicitly addressed when he finally got the opportunity to speak in front of a stadium full of hopeful Zimbabweans. I will leave you with this quote and the link to the entire speech which I can highly recommend reading.

“People of Zimbabwe, we face many challenges but we are brave and resourceful. By uniting as a nation and a people we can succeed. If you match our efforts with your own, we will succeed, if you match our desires with your own, we will succeed, if you match our dreams for Zimbabwe with your own, we will succeed.
At each point in our proud history we have looked forward not backwards, we have stood for hope not fear, we have believed in love not hate, and we have never lost touch with our democratic values or sight of our democratic goals.”
http://www.thezimbabwetimes.com/?p=11428

Will Grassby

Public Space

For the next three weeks the city of Ottawa will be buzzing with the revelry surrounding the annual Winterlude festival. Winterlude is a three-week celebration put on by the National Capital Commission (NCC) in Ottawa and Gatineau, simply celebrating winter. Centred around the world’s largest (take that, Winnipeg) skating rink, the Rideau Canal, the festival includes skating, ice and snow sculptures, live music, and many other winter-related activities. In 2007, the event drew an estimated 1.6 million visitors to the various Winterlude sights, setting a new attendance record.

As a recent citizen of Ottawa, I have come to love Winterlude. It is truly a celebration of winter in Canada, which is something a lot of people would rather avoid. The greatest part of this event is the openness and inclusiveness. Activities are free and open to everybody. They span multiple sights and multiple provinces. The ice sculptures at Confederation Park are connected by the 7.8km skateway that is the frozen canal to the various events at Dow’s Lake, with this stretch opening up a large part of downtown Ottawa. Funded and run by the NCC, the event is not branded with a corporate slogan (although some of the activities are).

What this represents, to me at least, is a city embracing its culture and extending a culture of inclusiveness to its citizens. Events are free and family friendly, and run day-long on the weekends. The Canal is open for skating for most of the winter, and becomes a way for people to get outside and get some exercise when it would be too cold to do much else otherwise, and even becomes a mode of transit for many people going to work or school. It revels in the creativity of ice sculptors from around the world, and celebrates different parts of the country. (This year there is a giant lobster to commemorate New Brunswick’s 225th anniversary as a province independent of Nova Scotia.) Last year a very cold Joel Plaskett performed, and this year features Jim Cuddy among others. All free and outdoors.

What it really boils down to for me is a city’s use of its public space. Communal areas in a city should be open and free for all citizens, and when a city orchestrates an event like Winterlude, it is embraces this spirit. On a trip to Europe last summer I was impressed by the use of public space. Strolling along the Seine you are surrounded by public art, musical ensembles, and people playing bocce. A city that embraces this non-commercial, non-regulated use of its space for the betterment of its citizens is a city that I want to live in and be a part of.

Toronto and Ottawa (and I’m sure many other Canadian cities) do an excellent job with the maintenance of outdoor rinks by the dedicated staff. These rinks provide fantastic ways for children to get active and develop a love of sports and the outdoors. As a houseleague hockey coach in Ottawa, I have two players on my team this year who have never played organized hockey before, but both are doing exceptionally well because of the skills and the love of the game they developed playing outdoors. And there’s nothing quite like fresh skates on hard ice with the wind at your back and a friend to pass the puck to.

So, here’s to Winterlude; and public space; and outdoor ice; and people having fun in the city in which they live.

Russel MacDonald

A Size Twelve Double Standard

The recent copycat shoe-throwing incident at Cambridge University and the subsequent reaction from Chinese authourities has many wondering when the shoe is going to drop on these projectile protests.

A report in the Toronto Star discusses how back in December when it was George Bush doing the dodging it was all fun and games. Now that Chinese Premier Wen Jinbao is the sole victim it is “a despicable act.”

Ultimately one has to ask the question, what would we think as Canadians if someone was to chuck a loafer or two at Stephen Harper? For some reason outrage is not the first word that comes to mind. I would suggest that even hardcore Conservatives could probably see the humour in a Canadian edition of the political shoe-toss (Especially after the recent liberalizing of the budget). In all seriousness however, something needs to be done about the aim-deficiency of these shoe flingers before moving onto such targets as Harper. I’m not suggesting they should actually hit Harper with the shoe (heaven forbid it should disturb his almost sacred coiffure), but the shoe should at least make him dance a little bit. Maybe that would help him loosen up for a change and shake the starch out of his suit.

But I digress…My actual reaction to this incident was more one of *yawn, that’s so 2008.

The truth is that if you want to make a point you shouldn’t steal ideas from others, especially when you have a rubber arm like this guy did. (you can get a first hand look at where the shoe landed in relation to the Premier here:


I guess my intention here is to have a little bit of fun, but there are reasons behind every protest, even the comical ones. China’s human rights record and history of cover-ups and control is no laughing matter. I have no doubt that this protestor was entirely serious in his protest as you can hear him yell out calling the Premier a dictator and subsequently saying “Shame on you!” in response to the Premier saying the same towards him. Unfortunately this particular protest will not likely bring much attention to the issues at hand but instead be seen as a feeble copycat to the Bush event in December.

In any case, I think it can safely be said that the era of shoe-throwing, at least outside of kindergarten classes, should be given the boot.

Will Grassby

Hats off to (Stephen) Harper

Full disclosure: I am not a Conservative. While I can perhaps understand and appreciate the philosophy behind smaller-government neo-liberalism and personal responsibility, any affinity I may have for right-wing ideology ends there. I do not believe in bigger jails and longer sentences, nor do I support increased military budgets, especially at the expense of education, healthcare, or other socially beneficial programs. I am even more so opposed to any brand of social conservatism, preaching vague moral standards to which everybody must adhere. With that in mind, my thesis may seem like a logical extension of that train of thought, but: I do not like Stephen Harper. I believe him to be as self-interested and power-hungry as his fellow parliamentarians he denounces so quickly, and he intentionally spreads misinformation to further his objectives. He seems to hold little interest in inclusiveness or genuine debate, and instead treats the Canadian people like dupes.

I am sure Stephen Harper is an intelligent man, and a man of some convictions (he apparently favours overtime to shootouts). In 1997 he left the Reform Party and joined the libertarian think-tank National Citizens Coalition, accusing Preston Manning and the rest of the Reformers of drifting towards social conservatism. He only returned to the national political scene in 2002 replacing Stockwell Day as the leader of the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance (CCRAP), err, Canadian Alliance, and went about uniting the right, in order to solidify the opposition forces and present a consolidated opposition to the majority Liberals, in much the same scenario presenting today’s left-leaning parties against the Conservatives.

Here Harper’s ascent has largely mirrored the fate of the Liberal party in the past decade, often with Harper critical of the similar moves when made by the Liberals. As mentioned he faced a divided right which he sought to unify to defeat the Liberals. He has also faced a minority parliament as leader of the opposition, when Paul Martin held a minority in 2004. When Martin’s government put forward its budget, Harper sided with the (gasp) separatists in an attempt to bring down the government. It was only through floor-crossing, independents, and all-‘round shenanigans that the Liberals managed to cling to power for a little while longer. The Liberals have since faced a divided left; Bloc support; and Conservative shenanigans that have allowed them to cling to power (for a little while longer).

But what displeases me most about Mr. Harper is his apparent disregard for the intelligence of the Canadian public (what displeased me about the Canadian public is their propensity to prove him right). Conservative seagulls have been pooping on Stéphane Dion from the day he was elected. While perhaps much of the blame should lie with Dion for failing to create his own identity for himself and his Green Shift, the Harper attack machine had been running in high-gear from day one. He was never interested in engaging Dion, but rather focused on the ‘tax increase’ and Dion’s language deficiencies.

But even more appalling is the way he has handled the ‘constitutional crisis’ we faced after his November 2008 fiscal update. Just seven weeks after an election in which he failed once again to secure a majority government, he presented a budget to the House of Commons that was riddled with divisive partisanship that he arrogantly assumed the opposition parties would be too weak to oppose. When they did stand up to him he was in full back-peddle mode, dropping epithets wherever he could and intentionally misleading Canadians. He immediately dismissed the Bloc Québécois as separatists (the same separatists he was looking for support from when looking to defeat the minority Liberals), and he derided the Liberals and NDP for seeking their support, even though I’m certain he would have welcomed their support of his budget had it been there. He even went so far as to suggest that the coalition was signed without the presence of a Canadian flag, which was either a bad metaphor gone awry or the first of many lies to come.

In the coming days, Harper derided the coalition as unconstitutional and without merit, and gained much public support for this view, and yet this is completely untrue, and the leader of our democratic country should not stoop to these levels. Whatever your thoughts on the coalition, it was completely constitutional and represented the proper functioning of a Westminster parliament under a minority government, and for the leader of the country to suggest otherwise is an intentional attempt to mislead the public. He did not merely express dissatisfaction with the coalition and implore Canadians and their elected officials to reconsider, but he directly said, in an address to the nation: “the opposition does not have the democratic right to impose a coalition with the separatists”, and further suggested that “the opposition wants to overturn the results of (the recent) election.” A coalition would not be overturning the results of any election, as all elected MPs would remain, and the opposition is well within its democratic right to form a coalition with the consent of the Governor General, and these are both facts which the Prime Minister is fully aware of.

In fact, the most questionable constitutional manoeuvre was performed by Harper himself when he asked Michaëlle Jean for a prorogation of government in order to avoid a vote he was certain to lose. (I still haven’t made up my mind on her decision yet: I believe it was unprecedented and against the letter of the constitution, but at the same time it was probably the best move for the country at the moment. Whether that makes it a good move or a bad move, I’m still not sure.) He was a desperate man attempting to cling to power, just as he accused Dion of being a desperate man attempting to obtain power.

So for his actions alone in the face of this crisis which he brought upon himself, I oppose Mr Harper. That is to say nothing of his various discrepancies, such as an opposition statement of not offering special status for Québec, only to declare them a nation once in power; or appointing eighteen unelected senators when it appeared his government may fall, despite promising not to do this and instead rally for senate reform; or passing a law enacting fixed-date elections to prevent sitting Prime Ministers from calling snap elections to their own benefit, and then promptly calling a snap election to his own benefit. (There was actually a challenge brought forth by a legal group contending the 2008 election was illegal based on Harper breaking this law.)

So more than anything else I dislike Stephen Harper for the way he handled the coalition crisis. He brought it on himself with his partisan politics, and then attempted to worm his way out of it by intentionally misleading the public. He showed that he not only believes the opposition parties are weak, but that he believes the Canadian people are gullible and unintelligent. These are in no way actions befitting of the Prime Minister of Canada.

Russel MacDonald