ELECTION DAY, THE SEQUEL

I woke up this morning thinking it was 2004 all over again. Reading through the latest news on the web over breakfast found me greeted by a large dose of fear-mongering. Once again, the party of mud is running ads of a personal nature against their opposition because it is the only tactic that can have any profound affect on the direction of the campaign.

In 2004, Stephen Harper announced $58 billion dollars in tax cuts and new spending. The Liberal response? Paul Martin stated that this was “irresponsible” and that it costed for “tens of billions” more than Canada could afford. We were warned that “the rightwing” extremist party was going to drive up the deficits should they be elected. The threats worked and support for the Conservative Party began to melt.

We all know what became of the Liberal spending policy that year. It mushroomed. Not only did it reach the proposed Conservative spending plateau, but it surpassed it. Canada’s economy handled it just fine. While Stephen Harper had stated that there were huge surpluses coming, Paul Martin denied that fact, which leads me to only two conclusions. Paul Martin was lying or his party does not know how to read economic indicators.

What happened last year? Was the Conservative plan too expensive or not? Did Canada’s economy snowball unexpectedly or was Stephen Harper right? Or did someone else simply lie to us?

Now once again, the Liberals have resumed their scare tactics. They are up in arms over the upcoming deficits that they claim will assail our country should we dare to not vote Liberal. It’s sort of like the neighbourhood bully warning you that you will miss him when he is gone, and that you won’t be safe without him.

It seems to matter not to Mr. Martin that some of the leading economics majors in our country have stated that the Harper plan is indeed economically feasible. Their latest threat is that the plan will not work if Canada’s economy should falter. Anybody with any sense knows that that statement is true, but that it also applies to any party’s economic projections. The fact remains that the Liberals continue to understate Canada’s economic strength and continues to ridicule anyone who reports the upcoming surpluses before they can do so.

What seems to be lost here is a plan to rid us of these surpluses. A budget isn’t supposed to plan on how to spend them, it is supposed to eradicate them. If Canadians are paying too much tax, then we need a party who is going to aggressively cut the amount of money that we are being made to fork over.

The Liberals will never do that, as they feel this cushion is slush money with which to promise us the world at election times, such as now. The NDP will never return any of it, as they feel that it belongs to those men and women who care not and will not contribute to our country. For the record, I have no problem with helping those who can not contribute, but there is a huge difference between can not and will not. Jack Layton and the NDP do not seem to be able to tell the difference.

The latest ads on the Liberal website compare Mr. Harper to Mr. Harris of the Ontario “Common Sense Revolution”. It tries to suggest that we will have “decaying hospitals” should we vote Conservative. Are the Liberals suggesting Mike Harris destroyed Ontario hospitals and the health system? What an utter farce. It was Jean Chretien who cut decimated transfer payments to the provinces, and that my friends is why our health care system is on the verge of collapse.

Non partisan groups have openly stated that the funding that the Liberals have promised for health care simply returns it to where it would have been had the draconian cuts of the Liberals not been implemented. If Mike Harris is responsible for the state of health care, tell me something? How does the Premier of Ontario destroy the health care system in every province in our country? If it was only Ontario’s hospitals that were suffering, I would consider the accusation. But since this is a problem that is acute in every province, hence the agreements with all of them signed by Paul Martin, then I must concur that the damage was caused by the federal government. So should you,. because that is the simple reality and facts will bear this out.

Since Paul Martin and his friends have opened the door to comparing federal candidates to Ontario Premiers, let us do the same. Mr. McGuinty, the current Liberal premier of Ontario. This man broke every campaign promise that he ran on. While I don’t want to start any name calling, Mr. McGuinty simply did not tell us the truth during his campaign. His list of pledges was huge, and he failed to keep any of them. Since Mr. McGuinty was elected, my taxes have increased, municipal taxes are soaring because of his policies, my gas bill is in the stratosphere, and the province’s economy has slowed.

Love him or hate him, Mike Harris did the opposite of Mr. McGuinty. Mike Harris kept every campaign promise that he made. I can understand why the Liberals hated him so much. He was setting a precedent that they couldn’t meet. It’s called Honesty. I believe that comparing Stephen Harper to Mike Harris is yet one more foolish move that will simply serve to show Canadians who and what their choices really are.

Other points of reference in the Liberal attack ads are simply aimed at yet another tried and true campaign tactic; anti-Americanism. After thrashing the Americans in the second English language debate by trying to suggest that compassion and understanding are not American values, Mr. Martin now wishes to scare Canadians by portraying the opposition as “Bush’s best friend.” Other references are made to Stephen Harper’s “American friends” and one seedy ad even suggests that American conservatives are funding his campaign.

So much for campaigning in an atmosphere of respect, eh, Mr. Martin? I guess when you have no new ideas besides socialism, no record on which to run, no shortage of scandals and investigations from which to run from, there is nothing else you could possibly do but try to make your opponents look worse than you are. Good luck, my friend.