Stephen Harper is an excellent choice for those who value americanization over canadian identity....
Well Canada and the United States share a trade partnership that's worth about 2 billion dollars a day that helps pay for the social programs, health care, etc. Having a leader that thumbs his nose at them rather than trying to make the best of a difficult situation isn't in the best interest of Canada either. Granted Martin hasn't done this yet, but the previous Liberal government did. Further, this is one of the areas that Martin and Harper have common ground because Martin has said that improving relations with the US is a top priority for him too.
...for those who no longer wish to be welcomed into other countries when travelling, for those who long to wear the stars and stripes with pride....
No offense, but I think you're overreacting a little.
...for those who are taking backwards steps in tolerance and acceptance....
Care to elaborate on that?
...for those who support tax cuts for big business....
That's half true. The conservatives want to redirect industrial subsidies toward lower taxes and increased research and development.
...for those who see the $2 billion invested in the Canadian military as necessary and more important than health care....
eh? Where do you get $2 billion? Both the Conservatives and Liberals plan on spending $7 billion on the military. Further, while some criticize Harper for the two aircraft carriers that are included in his military plan, it's important to note that they're small carriers that hold about a dozen helicopters each, and Martin's plans include three ships that hold helicopters, trucks, etc, which you can read about here:
The Joint Support Ship Project.
...and for those who are anxious to join in slaughtering and humiliating the people of Iraq.
Harper said we should support our allies and our troops. The Liberals already had Canadian troops in Iraq as part of an exchange program while stating that they are against the war. If they are against the war, a decision I agree with, they should have relocated the troops to a place like Afghanistan where they can still work with the Americans as part of an exchange program, but in an operation that their government supports. Included in the exchange program is Brigadier-General Walt Natynczyk who is suppose to be 2nd in command of 130,000 troops. In addition to this, there are Canadian warships in the area.
If you can provide a source where Harper has said Canada should have sent more troops to Iraq, by all means do, but all I heard was support, and let's be realistic, it's not like Canada has a lot of troops to send.
Some people like to compare Harper to Mulroney, and say that the Conservatives will lead us into war while the Liberals will keep us out of wars. Let's look at the record:
Mulroney insisted on a UN resolution for the first Iraq war, and while people say he was too close to Ronald Reagan, he said no to Reagan on SDI [the Strategic Defence Initiative missile plan], Nicaragua, Cuba and South Africa.
While Mulroney and Reagan were good friends, Clinton and Chretien were too. The Liberals got Canada involved in Kosovo under NATO not the UN, and according to international law, the UN charter, chapter 7, there are two conditions under which a country can go to war: with a UN resolution, or in self defence. Further, a good chunk of the Canadian navy has been enforcing the sanctions on Iraq over the last decade that the Liberals have been in charge, which killed more people than both wars combined. As the world has seen when America went in the 2nd time, the sanctions did little to hurt Saddam.
Another area that Harper and Martin have common ground, which is related to the military issue, is the Missile Defence Program. Both have said they'll consider it.
For those that are convinced that Harper has a dangerous hidden agenda, consider this: Regardless of who wins, it'll most likely be a minority government. If Harper wants to get anything done, and survive, he'll have to work with others. If he does a bad job, as some say he will, I'm sure the Liberals will still be strong enough to give people another option.
It's often suggested that Harper will cut social programs. The Liberals can take credit for turning a $42 billion annual deficit into a multi-billion surplus, but how did they do that? By cutting back on social programs, health care, and the military. The idea is not to have a surplus with underfunded programs, or overspending, but rather a balance. Both the Conservatives and Liberals have said they'll spend more money on things like health care and the military now that there is a surplus.
I'm not a supporter of either party, and I'm not trying to paint a picture of Conservatives having it all right, and the Liberals having it all wrong, just balancing things a little.