To Republicans I humbly suggest that we make it possible for Democrats to give up their quest for redistribution of income and wealth by our acceptance of an appropriate role for government in financing those public goods and services necessary to secure a social safety net below which no American would be allowed to fall.

We should not have the U.S. government buying stock in American industries - the financial industry or any other industry.

The American Dream coupled with government subsidies of utilities and cheap consumer goods courtesy of slave labour somewhere else has kept the poor huddled masses from rising up.

We oppose the reactionary policies of the U.S. government but we do not oppose the American people. We want to have many good friends in the United States.

I forget what the relevant American rate is but I can tell you that our goal is to have a combined federal-provincial corporate tax rate of no more than 25 percent. We're on target to do that by 2012. We will have significantly - by a significant margin the lowest corporate tax rates in the G-7 and that's our - our government's objective.

I think the American government is now the most corrupt government in the world.

In any crass political calculation drilling for oil will always win more votes than putting a price on carbon. But if I recall what I was taught in fifth-grade American government class we elect presidents to do more than crass political calculations.

What the Founding Fathers created in the Constitution is the most magnificent government on the face of the Earth and the reason is this: because it was intended to preserve the American society and the American spirit not to transform it or destroy it.

President Bush once said that marriage is a sacred institution and should be reserved for the union of one man and one woman. If this is the case - and most Americans would agree with him on this - then I have to ask: Why is the government at all involved in marrying people?

One side of the American psyche wants smaller government lower taxes and more choices for individuals even if those choices increase risk. The other wants a strong social safety net to protect the weakest among us even if it costs more to minimize risk.