Stephane Dion - too academic, not a leader.

Oh, wait.

Except that part of the subprime market in the US was not what caused the problem, despite what Fox News kept claiming. It certainly exacerbated it but only slightly. The number and volume of mortgage crashes can in no way be attributed to that segment of subprime.

As a matter of fact, Harper not only advocated gutting those banking regulations, but when in power he actually made several banking regulation changes that were almost disastrous. For example, he introduced no money down 40 year mortgages all guaranteed by us taxpayers which is the kind of subprime mortgage that led to the catastrophe in the US. Not only that, but he introduced it after the implosion had started in the US. It was such a hairbrained scheme and so obviously dumb and potentially calamitous that they partially phased it out 18 months later. We're still on the hook for $300-400 MILLION in guarantees though. I'll never think of Harper as good on the economy after that.

Selective memory is what you suffer. As you disregard similar posts by Wherry on others.

As for decontextualizing, how can it be decontextualized when he provides the entire link to the original source?

I've never met a bigger bunch of incessant whiners than conservatives about the media. So selective in their generalizations and memory.

To be a Liberal shill, don't you have to, I don't know, shill for the Liberals? Maybe at least once? Instead of making the same kind of cracks at them that you make about the Conservatives?

But I guess in your world, where not actively out promoting Conservatives means you "hate" them, I suppose it may make sense that criticising them less means you are a shill. {roll eyes}

Quoting the Prime Minister of Canada and even quoting what the Prime Minister of Canada says now and comparing to what he said 5 years, 5 months, 5 days or even 5 minutes ago is not "Harper hating".

Especially when you always provide links to the original source.

Just because you are not actively out promoting someone, doesn't mean you "hate" them.

Oh for the love of...

Would you stop with the incessant wherry whining already.

Reminds me a bit about this:

[youtube LU9qNWUxxvI&feature=youtu.be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU9qNWUxxvI&feature=youtu.be youtube]

Oh, Dennis. So believing. So naive.

The per vote subsidy is only one of the many subsidies the Conservatives rake in cash more than others on. The biggest is the tax credit subsidy from which they benefit way way more than any other. Notice how they haven't ever talked about that in all their faux disgust over public subsidies. Or the millions and millions of dollars they raked in from expense reimbursements, the kind of thing that has got them into such hot water for breaking the law they loved those subsidies so much. They are the most subsidized party by far and will be even more so after the per vote subsidy goes.

The Conservatives only used a fraction of their own money for the ads, millions and millions and millions of dollars worth of unprecedented personal attack ads.

If only democracy worked or politicians were kept to their own words, the Cons would not be taking our money for this disgusting sort of stuff.

The Tories are the most subsidized party by far. They paid for those ads with our money.