Once again we are being inundated with political rhetoric, specifically in the Delta Optimist issue of June 17.
What does Harry Seddon's letter "Guide fails to provide unbiased information" prove. Of course, the government is trying to convince the citizens that the HST is the better than the alternatives, otherwise they would not have introduced it, two years ago. The apparent intention is to inform the citizens, as it states, "government statement on the HST referendum." How else can they educate the people?
On the last page, the section, "Important Notice to BC voters from Elections BC", is to inform people that this information "does not include your ballot", so that people won't wonder where the ballot is. Is this paranoia of deception or common sense? It depends on your position, right? Does Elections BC have any authority for input to the HST pros and cons? Shouldn't people know that?
Many of the people, originally fooled by Vander Zalm, have since been educated but some are embarrassed that they followed a charlatan without understanding the implications, so they continue to be angry at the government and look for every opportunity to discredit the politicians.
Others have been angry at the anti HST promoters and, what was at the beginning and is still in some journals now, a biased and insulting media.
Vote "yes" if you feel the HST is not good for BC or you if you must, but there are many citizens, not just "big business, big media and the Fraser Institute" that want the HST as much as you don't want it. Some people want as much information as the government can give so that they can make an intelligent decision.
Remember, "propaganda" works both ways. Ask Vander Zalm where we will get the $2.9 billion for our social services or which services should be canceled.
Vote "no" against anarchy!