Happy Jack

It turns out attack ads, not imitation, may be the sincerest form of flattery.

With less than a week to go in the campaign, both the Conservatives and the Liberals have released the hounds on Jack Layton and his surging New Democrats. Their actions smack of desperation and are unlikely to be effective.

The question on the minds of many pundits, of course, is why Canadians are turning to Layton and the NDP. And while not even Nostradamus can predict these kinds of seismic shifts in the political landscape, it's far easier to explain them in retrospect. Heck, even I can do it, so here goes.

Being the frontrunners, and sensing a majority was within reach, Conservative strategy from the outset was to play it safe. So Harper has campaigned inside a bubble, keeping the media at bay, refusing to entertain more than five questions a day, and restricting access to his events to those who've been vetted by his security forces. He has promised little beyond a few far-distant tax cuts to select groups, who were already committed to him anyway. This may be red meat to the true believers, but it's failed to make new converts, and the Conservatives have seen their support slowly erode.

A Gloomy Gus by nature, Harper's bigger mistake may have been to misjudge the mood of Canadians. He has warned of coalition chaos, of a sea of troubles lapping at our shores, and of economic black holes if he doesn't receive a majority. The Nervous Nellies and Fraidy Freds among the electorate may enjoy the thrill of horror when subjected to dire predictions of calamities to come, but most of us would prefer to hear a more hopeful version of the future, if only for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

And this is the reason, I think, why voters are turning to "Happy Jack" Layton. He's offering a vision of a better future and he's selling it with a smile.

The Liberals, too, have a progressive platform, but the Conservatives have been attacking Michael Ignatieff for several years now and have defined him in the minds of many Canadians. This is unfortunate, because these people would be favourably impressed if they actually saw and heard him.

But the Conservative attack machine initially ignored Layton in this campaign. Besides, Layton has been around long enough that Canadians already had formed their own impression of his character, and polls have always shown that they liked what they saw. Tired of minority governments, yet still deeply mistrustful of Stephen Harper, it seems Canadians are ready to strike out on a course none of the pundits foresaw.

So, maybe it all boils down to this: it's spring. The snow is gone, the daffodils are blooming, young men are having their fancies turned. It's the season of hope and Stephen Harper's message of doom and gloom is falling on deaf ears. We'd much rather be having a beer on the patio with Happy Jack.

What You Buy With Your Taxes

I attended a local all-candidates meeting the other evening where the Conservative candidate, the disgraced Bev Oda, trumpeted her government's record of cutting taxes. After another round of tax cuts to corporations already earning record profits, she predicted a bright, shiny future for the nation, when the federal government would be further starved of revenue and even deeper in debt. Of course, she didn't put it quite that way.

Tax cutting has become an article of faith for the right, despite its disastrous effects on public services, infrastructure, and finances. I've explored the roots of this virulent political pathology before, here and here, arguing that taxes are not merely a necessary evil, but help create a healthy and prosperous society and economy.

Last week, I forwarded a link to David Olive's blog to some friends about an idea gaining ground in the U.S.: the tax receipt calculator. The idea is to enable people to plug in the amount of tax they pay and allow them to see what their taxes are getting them. It's one potential antidote to anti-tax hysteria.

Heather Mallick, writing in the Toronto Star recently, made the point that most of our social and economic problems stem from the fact we don't pay enough taxes. Underfunding caused by decades of tax cuts has resulted in lengthy medical wait times; sky-high tuition and student debt; crumbling schools, roads, bridges, and water pipes; one million Canadian children living in poverty; a lack of nursing home beds and child care spaces; ubiquitous user fees; the growing gap between the rich and the rest of us.

She enumerated the many things our taxes provide us. Here is a partial list from her article, as well as some items of my own. Which ones would you be willing to forfeit in order to get another tax cut (or to give one to a big corporation)?

• Roads, traffic lights, street signs, guard rails, railway signals, line painting, snow plowing, salting and sanding
  
• Armed forces, Coast Guard search and rescue, veterans' pensions, military cemeteries, repatriation ceremonies, war memorials, Remembrance Day observances
  
• Restaurant inspectors, drug testing and approval, auditors-general
  
• Schools, teachers, school bus drivers, crossing guards, universities, colleges, apprenticeship programs
  
• Bridges, tunnels, ferries, ports, locks, docks
  
• Flags on public buildings, embassies
  
• Public libraries, librarians, books, commercial-free CBC radio
  
• Water mains, sewers, sidewalks, streetlights
  
• Police, fire, paramedics
  
• Hospitals, doctors, nurses, immunization, MRI's, chemotherapy, autopsies
  
• Courts, judges, bailiffs, prisons and guards, customs and immigration officers, CSIS
  
• National, provincial, and municipal parks, historic sites, museums
  
• Weather forecasting, mapping, money minting and printing
  
• Pensions, unemployment insurance, interest on national and provincial debt
  
• Hockey rinks, baseball diamonds, tennis courts, swimming pools, soccer fields
  

It's perhaps ironic that some of the strongest defenders of taxation have been American. "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society," said Associate Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in 1904. And just last week in a speech at The George Washington University in Washington , D.C., U.S. President Obama paraphrased Abraham Lincoln when he stated, "…through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves."

For the sake of our children and grandchildren, we'd be wise to listen to them.

Born That Way

They can't help themselves.

Conservatives I mean. The media reported recently on a study in the on-line edition of Current Biology that there are differences in the brain structures between those with liberal and those with conservative views.

This isn't the first study to suggest such a difference. Another one a few years ago in the journal Nature Neuroscience reported similar findings.

Seems Lady Gaga was correct: "I'm on the right track baby; I was born this way."

Now I know some of you are thinking, "Being Conservative is just a lifestyle choice. With intensive therapy, they can be changed; they can become moderate, tolerant, sensible, even."

Me, I'm not so sure. Anyway, most of them seem perfectly happy the way they are.

Besides, how do you get through to someone who believes that the poor have too much and the rich have too little?

Or that access to health care should depend on your ability to pay?

Or that higher education should be beyond the reach of all but the offspring of the elites?

Or that billions need to be spent on new jails despite falling crime rates?

Or that "strong leaders" make elections unnecessary?

But if conservatives (and by extension, Conservatives) are "born that way", I guess as a liberal, compassionate, reasonable person I really ought to stop picking on them; it's not their fault.

Actually, just as long as they stick to their own hangouts (boardrooms, donut shops, Coach's Corner), I really don't care. What bothers me is their openly flaunting their Conservativist lifestyle, or forcing it on others.

It's not like they're in the majority or anything.

More Spring 2011 Points Offers

Thought you might enjoy a break from all the election news, so here you are:

Until June 30, Hilton Hotels is offering 1,000 bonus Hilton HHonors points with each night's stay. That's in addition to the regular points and airline miles you earn. Hilton's plan is unique in that members "double dip", earning both for each stay. You must register for the promotion here.

If your plans include several nights in hotels over the next few months, Hyatt hotels is offering 10K bonus Hyatt Gold Passport points after you stay five nights, and an additional 5K bonus points for every two nights you stay beyond five. That's on top of the regular earning rate of five points per dollar spent. Free nights begin at 5K points, with most hotels being in the 8K and 12K point categories. So a week at a Hyatt property could get you two or three free nights. You must register here.

Goldpoints Plus is now Club Carlson and it's offering an excellent promotion until June 15: stay twice and earn a free night. This can be an economical way to stay in an expensive city. Two low cost Country Inn and Suites stays can get you that free night at a Radisson. You must be a Club Carlson member and register for the promotion. You have until December 31, 2011 to use your free nights.

Choice Hotels, in conjunction with MBNA Bank Canada, is offering a no-fee MasterCard that lets you earn Choice Privileges points for every dollar you spend on it. There's also an 8K point sign-up bonus. Details and application form are here.

And speaking of credit cards, back in the fall I told you about the Starwood Preferred Guest American Express card. The card is still available with a 10K point sign-up bonus, but unlike last year, American Express is no longer waiving the annual fee of $120 for the first year (or for renewals).

So, as intended, I cancelled my SPG Amex card (I keep all my Starwood points). But when I called American Express, they offered me their new Gold Rewards card with 15K points as a sign-up bonus and no annual fee for the first year. So I accepted that offer. I earn one point per dollar spent on the card, two for spending on travel, gas, grocery, and drug store purchases. Amex Membership Reward points can be applied directly to your Amex bill for travel related spending, or converted to points with several hotel and airline partners (for example, one to one to Aeroplan). I'll keep you posted on what I see is the best way to "earn and burn" these points.

To conclude, Niagara Spring Flings is offering Ontario and New York residents a chance to win a getaway in the Niagara peninsula. There's also a downloadable "Perks Card" offering such things as free wine tastings (yum!). Check it out here.

Have a Happy Easter.

How Conservative Are You?

Newsflash: turns out that a lot of people who thought they were Conservative really aren't that conservative.

That's one way to look at the reports that many Conservatives who have tried the CBC's Vote Compass have found they actually prefer Liberal or NDP policies.

There have, of course, been cries that the Vote Compass, prepared by a non-partisan group in the Social Sciences Department at the University of Toronto, is a commie CBC plot to pollute the hermetically sealed hearts and minds of the true blue.

I suspect it's more a case that some people with not-entirely-conservative views were persuaded by Conservative attack ads that depicted Michael Ignatieff as the anti-Christ.

Anyway, 500 Words was way ahead of the CBC and the U of T on this one.

Way back last October, we told you how to tell if you were turning into a Conservative.

Then, about six weeks later, we responded to readers who wondered if they were showing symptoms of creeping Conservatism.

And most recently, we explained how to be sure you're not a Conservative.

But with the election on, it seems the Vote Compass has revealed there's still a need for our, ahem, direction, so here are some more ways to tell whether or not you're a Conservative:

• If Jack and Gilles were your friends in 2004, but you don't want Iggy to play with them in 2011, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If you have friends who are crooks and liars, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If you do security checks on all your houseguests' Facebook friends, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If you believe that R.C.M.P. stands for 'R Conservative Meeting Police, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If you think that elections are fine for Arabs, but unnecessary for Canadians, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If your edition of Trivial Pursuit has only five questions, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If your shoulders ache from shrugging, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If all of your promises begin, "Maybe someday…", you might be a Conservative.
  
• If you have a license to drive, fly, hunt, fish, trap, and serve alcohol at your stag; and for your car, plane, boat, dog, software, ham radio, and marriage; but there's no way you're getting one for your gun, you might be a Conservative.
  
• If your vision for the future of Canada is more of the same, only worse, you might be a Conservative.
  

Go ahead; take the test. The country you save may be your own.

Tory Torpedoes of Truth are Duds

Conservative supporters should ask for their money back.

I know Harper's people decided to "go rogue" right out of the gate in this campaign, smearing and fear-mongering left, um, centre, and centre; but so far the Tory torpedoes of truth have been duds.

Their latest TV spot, released Thursday, is still fixated on coalitions. This after an entire week when the other parties beat Stephen Harper over the head on the question of his hypocrisy in proposing just such a coalition with the NDP and Bloc when Paul Martin led a minority Liberal government.

Thanks for reminding us.

And then there's the radio spot. I suppose the intent is to make me recoil in horror at the very mention of the name Michael Ignatieff, but the visceral reaction just ain't there. What happens instead is this soundtrack starts up in my head, playing the ad back at itself. For instance:

"Fact: a vote for the Liberals is a vote for Michael Ignatieff." Uh, sure, OK, and let me guess, a vote for the Conservatives is a vote for Stephen Harper? No, no, don't tell me: a vote for the NDP, is a vote for Jack Layton, right? The Greens, just a minute, I know this one, uh, Elizabeth May? Boo-yah! High five!

See what I mean? Just not feeling the fear here, dudes. Not smelling the old blood in the water.

Or, "Michael Ignatieff, he didn't come back for you." Of course not; he doesn't even know me. Anyway, I suppose he came back (oh, about six years ago, now), because he wanted to be the target of personal attacks. Or maybe it was to get into politics. Maybe even become Liberal leader and run for the prime minister's job.

Just like Stephen Harper gave up his job as a mouthpiece for Alberta separatists because of his burning desire to transform the rest of Canada into his version of the American Dream.

I say tomato; you say to-mah-to.

At least Ignatieff had seen the rest of the world. Before he became prime minister, the Albertan from Etobicoke (Rob Ford and Stephen Harper; boy, does Etobicoke have a lot to answer for) hadn't been anywhere else except for a few trips to the U.S. so he could tell American hard-rightists how much Canada sucked.

So I've gotta say I'm a little disappointed. The Conservatives are definitely off their game; Harper is back on his heels. We've come to expect real top-quality nasty from these guys. Where's the stomach-churning vitriol? The puerile fratboy pranks? The bird poop? The making fun of facial paralysis?

Come on, guys; you can do worse. We're all counting on you.

It’s Been One Week

The 2011 federal election campaign is barely a week old, and the big story is how badly (in the double sense) Stephen Harper has performed.

Harper kicked off the campaign by attacking his main rival, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, claiming Ignatieff would form a coalition with the NDP and the Bloc Québecois, even if the Conservatives won a plurality of seats. Ignatieff promptly disavowed any such intention, but Harper kept, um, harping, on the subject.

When confronted with the letter to the Governor-General that, along with Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe, he had signed in 2004, Harper denied that it was intended to propose a coalition as an alternative to the Paul Martin Liberal minority government. I referenced that letter in a previous post. You can read what Harper had to say on that occasion and be the judge of his intentions then and whether he's being truthful now.

This isn't the first time Harper has "reinterpreted" an earlier position. There was the essay in which he called Canada a "second-tier, socialistic country" back in 2000, and the infamous "firewall" letter of 2001. Understandably, he doesn't talk (openly) like that today, which is what fuels talk of his "secret" agenda.

So, OK, against Canada in 2000; in 2011, "Canadians first and only". In 2004, in favour of a coalition with "socialists and separatists"; in 2011, agin' 'em.

But Harper has set a new personal best for reversals, and lying about them, with this week's flip-flop on one-on-one debates: on Wednesday, he was issuing challenges; by Thursday, he was chickening out. Which led Maclean's blogger Scott Feschuk to dub the Conservative campaign plane "Chicken Wings". This one could stick around to haunt Harper: people can't always tell a liar, but they sure know a coward when they see one.

Harper's big campaign promise of the week landed with a giant thud. The offer to let select – only 13% would qualify, and only the richest would benefit – families income split to save on taxes had a couple of big ifs and whens attached: if and when he gets re-elected (twice), and if and when he eliminates the deficit. Voters can probably figure out for themselves whether the guy who managed to turn an inherited $14 billion surplus into a deficit of $55 billion is likely to ever balance the budget, especially after the corporations get their tax cut, and the jets and jails get paid for. Maybe Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, as a former Mike Harris operative, can explain to Harper the effect tax cuts have in creating permanent "structural" deficits.

Now it's revealed that Harper has alienated the media following him by restricting them to five questions a day: two in French, two in English, and one from a local reporter. And there'll be no questions about ethics allowed. That oughta keep the press conferences short.

It's still early in the campaign, of course, and voters may not yet be paying attention; or Harper and the Conservatives may yet find their feet; but it will be interesting to see what the polls reveal about the effect of the first week's gaffes.