A No-Holds-Barred Comparison of Canadian Political Leaders

I wrote the below reply on a social networking site called BookFace or something along those lines.  One of my friends, a poli sci student of Pakistani extraction, had come out in opposition against an investment agreement Canada was planning with China.  I posted a series of replies, and then figured... hey, that could make a great overview on Canadian politicos!So, here goes, verbatim et literatim, enjoy.

Much as I dislike Stephen Harper, free trade is not the reason. The world is getting smaller, and I would be surprised if, in thirty years, national borders hold any meaning whatever beyond the social construct of "culture". If there WILL be any borders, they will be big, supranational ones between power blocs (EU, NAFTA, Commonwealth, CIS, etc) and not between nation-states as we know them today.

The real problem with Stephen Harper is his agreement with, and endorsement of, American aggression in the Middle East and elsewhere. Harper is waging war for fun and profit. Not cool, dude.

But think of the alternatives. Justin Trudeau is an annoying brat who hasn't the foggiest idea of how the world works. He is obnoxious, inexperienced, and utterly unqualified for the job he wishes to hold. He is a locum history teacher, who has admitted to recreational drug abuse in the presence of his two small children. He wants government spending left, right, and centre, when we haven't the money to spend in the first place. And most gallingly, he thinks that the name makes the man, rather than vice versa. He thinks he's some sort of Canadian Rockefeller.

Thomas Mulcair shares Trudeau's spendomania. That's really his biggest problem. The other problem is that under his tenure, the Canadian NDP has returned to its roots, rather than Layton's softer "Liberals of the Left" version. This might not sound like such a problem, until you realise that the old NDP, as well as the new NDP, is Canada's answer to the British Labour Party of the Fifties, rather than Labour of today. Old Labour/NDP are both parties run by the working class (aka those who are on their feet at work) for the working class. We are not working class. We are middle class. I don't want the unions (especially not Mafia-influenced unions like the Teamsters) running the show. Otherwise, Mulcair is actually an honest man.
  
And then there's Elizabeth May. The best and worst that can be said for her is that she's a complete and utter nutbar. Not to say she's a moron. Big difference. But because of her over-riding goal of ecological activism, sustainability, carbon neutrality, or God knows what the word for it is nowadays, she's willing to tank the Canadian economy. Her ideas, although they may be solid ten, fifteen, or twenty years down the line, are absolutely pie in the sky today. The problem is that if you impose controls on companies so as to save the Earth upon which you walk, you will make these companies bankrupt and thus lead yourself straight into the mouth of destitution.

God's honest truth is that the Liberals are THE party for Canada in times of economic boom. We are not in a boom. We are in the throes of the Great Recession, and the go-to party for depressions and recessions are the Conservatives. Simple as that.