John Kerry voted to raise taxes 350 times.

 

Sound like a lot? Well, that’s because the number is grossly exaggerated, and most likely a blatant twist on the facts, an inflated distortion of the truth.

 

According to a poll done in May, the claim made above (repeated in Bush television spots and by the usual right-wing talking-head drones) is actually believed by fifty-two percent of Americans polled ⁽¹⁾.

 

If the people believe the lie you’ve fed them, then you’ve won. At least such is the case in politics, where ugliness is beautiful and egregiousness and dishonesty equal success if it gets one any closer to victory.

 

I’m not just writing on the state of American politics—the same goes for Canadians, who’re just being introduced to the new Republican-North that is the new Conservative Party.

 

These Conservatives are not just extra-super-friendly to America in general (presumably at the expense of Canadian sovereignty), but the Bush-Republican squad specifically. Stephen Harper is a shyer, smarter, Canadian version of George W. Bush.

 

And when it comes to politics, his Conservative Party seems to be taking some delightfully dirty lessons in deception from the Republican National Committee. John Kerry voted to raise taxes 350 times? Well, you’ll never believe what Paul Martin did!

 

Taking a page right out of the Republican Playbook, the newest American-style attack on Martin is the claim that he has “increased taxes 63 times”.

 

A Conservative news release (available on the website of at least one Conservative candidate, Brian Jean of Northern Alberta) dated May 29 states, “Between 1993 and 2000 Paul Martin increased taxes 63 times”.

 

On June 1, Calgary Sun columnist Licia Corbella, a staunch Conservative (anyone nonchalantly referring to Paul Martin’s party as “lieberals” and “Fiberals” in a professional article can’t be a Lib), penned a column that ended by claiming, “Martin has raised our taxes at least 63 times”.

 

On CBC’s Cross Country Checkup on June 13, Conservative candidate Patrick Brown of Barrie, Ontario, again made the claim the Martin had raised taxes 63 times. The comment, along with Brown’s inane rant, caused his Liberal debate partner, the incumbent Aileen Carroll, to crack up in uproarious laughter. It had to be the comment that did it.

 

If this 63-tax-increase talking point sounds similar to the attack on John Kerry, and just as funny, that’s because it basically is.

 

Just as how Kerry’s 350-time tax increase calculation was grossly deceptive, such is this one. Martin may have raised taxes in the past, but its quite deceptive to not include mention of the whole story.

 

Contrary to Conservative claims, Martin introduced the largest tax cut in Canadian history in 2000: $100 billion over five years. He went further, eliminating capital tax on corporations, as well as raising tax-exempt threshold for RRSP contributions (which is great for those making over $75 000 per year, to whom the tax-cut applies). Apparently, of these Paul Martin tax cuts, more than thirty percent of the benefits went to the top five percent of richest Canadians ⁽²⁾.

 

According to a recent document, corporations will have a thirty-five percent tax cut—due to the 2000 budget of Paul Martin, the serial tax-increaser—in four years ⁽³⁾. Not enough for the Conservative Party? Or is this just politics as usual?

 

Anyone not living in a right-wing fantasyland is keenly aware of the fact that Martin has taken his Liberal government slowly but steadily rightward fiscally, especially tax-wise.

 

Telling voters that your party will lower taxes is one thing, and telling them that Paul Martin hasn’t lowered them quite enough is another—but when you deliberately mislead the public with claims about how many times Martin has “raised taxes”, while completely ignoring any of the many instances of his lowering them, you are bordering on intellectually criminal.

 

Canadians are already afraid of the right-wing agenda of the Conservative Party and their close connection to the Republican Party of the United States. Utilizing Republican political tactics, making it appear as if they’re fed talking-points directly from the Bush campaign team, won’t help the continuing nervousness regarding Harper’s Conservatives and what they represent.

 

 

 

(1) http://www.registerguard.com/news/2004/06/07/ed.edit.campaignads.0607.html

(2) http://www.cupe.ca/www/factsheets/pm_ceo

(3) Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2004