As a proud conservative supporter i am fairly convinced that this is not an actual proposal that the tories are willing to put forth, because let’s face it, the money saved would be immaterial to the ‘economic crisis’. I also believe that those of us smart enough to believe in the tories are smart enough to know that even if the government did nothing eventually the economy would get going on its own. this is just another cycle.

I think that this is a shrewd tactical move on harper’s part to test the political waters. Remember a few weeks ago when the liberals just about threw a hissy fit at the mere mention of a coalition, my how there song and dance has changed. They like to call harper a self serving political opportunist, hey kettle… your black.

If this proposal were to move forward i think it would lead to a decrease in the transparency of the large parties long term. Kazze is quick to point out that jack’s hero obama successfully (sic?) turned down public funds. The truth is, obama’s government system lends itself to a more laissez faire fundraising approach because they do not exist in a parliamentary system. Let’s be honest, cutting public funding would only leave room for the two major parties in our system. There is not enough checks and balances in our system to handle only two parties, corruption would be rampant. The only way it would work is with a complete change in our democracy, if that is where harper wants to go I say go nuts, but leave the public funding in place until after the change.

Sorry about grammar and run ons

How big of a deficit would the Marxist Morons demand to satisfy there union bosses’ excessive, mostly wasteful, spending?