There is the preception that Stephen Harper does not actually “love” Canada in its present state and that if we became more like America he would be a lot happier.

Some of his rhetoric supports that perception, his support of things like the US BMD system also promotes the idea, and even policy statements like changing federal elections to a “date certain” every 4 years like the Americans support that perception.

I have no doubt that Stephen Harper, and the rest of the CPoC, do love Canada - they are in the unfortunate position of being a minority group holding a different vision from the majority of what our country should be.

PeterP, the fact that Martin used to work for Desmarais makes ME nervous. http://tinyurl.com/8w6at

See? It works both ways.

stageleft - do you not find it curious that those supporting Alberta separation (i.e. REALLY leaving vs. BQ lite) would support a national party?

Pundits all seem to think that the CPC will never be a “national” party that can promote unity without seats in Quebec. But they don’t seem to care about Liberals and Alberta. So why, then, did PET pursuade a PC to cross the floor when the Libs were locked out of AB?

Just curious, mind.

And if you were to read some (maybe/maybe not the majority, difficult off the top of my head to say) of the separatist blogs regularly, you’d see a them of hating “what the Liberal gov’ts have DONE to Canada” and fear of more of the same. Big difference.

Just ask treehugger ;-)

“Andrew’s insidious CanConv, despite its horrific name”

Alright Mister Smarty-Pants. I’ll be rolling out a new version over Christmas (Stageleft will be happy - it will coincide with me switching my server to run linux)…. what better time to rename the beast? You have until year’s end to concoct a more catchy name by whatever devious means you feel like employing.

Andrew, you should have a contest to determine the new name (I nominate Skydome, since it is no longer taken). Now if only you had some sort of regularly updated, popular website to announce the contest on…

Declan,

But I have no such website…. ;)

Balbulican, your bias is showing.

When Michaelle Jean was asked essentially the very same question during the controversy over her GG appointment, you were beside yourself with outrage.

For lack of a better descriptor, this was a bullshit question, and “unprofessional” doesn’t begin to describe the journalist who asked it.

Candice, sorry, teeter-totter style “oh yeah well HE did THIS” arguments bore me to sleep. I don’t support Martin either. But people should think about who leaders are going to call when they get into a crunch and what kind of advice they’ll be getting from those people. Harper said publically that he’s still learning about the job and himself, and I think having a guide like David Frum on that learning adventure could be bad for Canada. But then again, we shouldn’t get too caught up in the election “distractions of the day”. I’m sure all the leaders will get much tougher questions than this as the weeks drag out.

Whatever, Mike H. Here’s what I think.

a) Harper is running for Prime Minister. As was the case with Mme. Jean, his willingness to put himself in that position assuages any concerns I might have had about his commitment to Canada, not that that I ever had any.

b) Many of the folks who have been promoting Alberta Separatism online seem to support Harper. Does that represent, in my opinion, a real issue? Not in the least (see “a”.) Is it a real concern for other Canadians? I don’t honestly know. Is it an issue the Liberals will exploit? If they think it has any legs at all, yes.

c) Was it a good question for a journalist to ask? Well, to be honest, yes and no. It’s getting good play (although more online than in print or broadcast), but as a story , it has no “oxygen”, no substance. So the reporter’s editor is probably happy…a byline got splashed around for a day. From that perspective…purely a media attention angle…it was a good question. Did it contribute anything of subtance to the political debate? No. Did it distract us from meaningful debate on policies and issues? Yes. From those perspectives, it was not a good question.

Well, it got coverage (which is one of the goals of a story). So from that perspective, it was a good question.

You’re not under the impression that reporters are supposed to ask identical sets of questions to all candidates, are you?

>>”You’re not under the impression that reporters are supposed to ask identical sets of questions to all candidates, are you?”

No, I just expect reporters to adhere to a reasonable standard of professional ethics.

>>”By the way, you seem to be having a hard time seeing the distinction I’m making between between (a) my opinion of what a real issue is, and (b) other folks opinions of what a real issue is.”

I think your opinion and the ” other folks ” opinions were the same yesterday, when you wrote your original post. That seems to have changed today.