Today Linda McQuaig writes in defence of the Layton-Martin budget. That in itself is no surprise, but her analysis should be.
McQuaig lauds the new spending on 'environment, public transit, affordable housing, post-secondary education and foreign aid' (only one of which is exclusively in federal jurisdiction) and then says:
" . . . and the Liberals had campaigned on them (this list of priorities) last year. By contrast, tax cuts for big corporations, cancelled in the Liberal-NDP deal, were never mentioned in the Liberal campaign. But then, that's how the Liberals have traditionally operated, promising popular social spending on the stump and then, after the election quietly making the real budget decisions in close consultation with business lobbyists."
So, because Liberals traditionally lie during campaigns, we should not be concerned that they lie during campaigns, but because the Liberals say the Conservatives are lying during a campaign, we should worry that the Conservatives may or may not be deceiving us.
It's okay to vote for a proven liar, because at least you know where you stand? What kind of logic is this?
When the Liberals make a promise -- we know they won't keep it -- and that is reassuring? I get it -- all is right with the world ---the Liberals are lying and I can sleep at night.
What if the Conservative 'hidden agenda' is that they will bring an end to hidden agendas, and actually implement the policies they campaign on?
We couldn't have that, now could we? We're Canadian and we don't like uncertainty. We must uphold the years-long tradition of Liberal lies -- how else could we be sure what was happening in Ottawa?