Descartes Properties issue - aka.Beating a dead horse

But only if it exists...just touching upon how ridiculous Descartes ontological argument is with regard to God, like most others have pointed out. Just because I can envision a perfect weasel (credit to Steinhart) doesn't mean that because I see it as perfect that it has to exist BECAUSE its perfect. If anything, the fact that I can envision something as perfect, or lacking of any flaws makes its existence that much less likely to me. What in this universe could possible be 'perfect', most things we envision as perfect turn out to be wild and crazy when looked at closely. In addition, perfection of something God can be entirely different to different people, shown by countless suicide bombers who believe they assure themselves many virgins in the afterlife for doing their 'Gods' work in this life.

Inate Ideas Descartes - Locke

In looking at Locke, it seems that his view on innate ideas make much more sense to me than those that Descartes explained. They both reason that these ideas are basically placed there by 'God', and are hence fully integrated into everyones mind as part of their existence. However, Locke then goes on to say that for these ideas to be integrated into everyones mind they would have to be universally applicable. This is crazy which is basically what he finds when he goes though examples of why that is not every truly the case. Because of that, he seems to say there is no such thing as an 'Innate' idea which makes much more sense to me than Descartes need to have God be an innate idea caused by a perfect being.

Descartes Will and Errors

Though our Will is given to us and is a 'perfect' form of this ability, it is still tempered by the minds intellect and ability to reason. That the source of some of our errors can be our ability to make concrete decisions according to our free will, even when presented inaccurate or incomplete knowledge. But what is to say that even if a person were to have full and complete knowledge of a situation that they would make the 'correct' choice? Many people make decisions that are not necessarily the right choice, but it is the one that they want to make. According to reason they are making an incorrect choice, but what if their goals are different than those we generally consider right and good?

does descartes faith conflict with discourse?

I feel that it does. In Descartes' Discourse, he emphasizes the need for a strict scientific method which can be applied to almost all things. However, when one tries to compare Descartes' arguments to the method laid out in his discourse, there certainly is a conflict, which suggests that either his method or his arguments are flawed.
For example, his first rule of Method is to: "never to accept anything for true which I did not clearly know to be such; that is to say, carefully to avoid precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise nothing more in my judgment than what was presented to my mind so clearly and distinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt." Yet, there certainly is still doubt surrounding his argument. His statement that God exists is not accepted as common fact, like the law of gravity or the Pythagorean theorem. There is no definitive evidence of God's existence, so Descartes' relies on conjecture instead, violating the first law. Some would argue that faith and scientific method do not go together, but I would disagree, at least in the case of Descartes, since he specifically attempts to prove the existence of god not as a matter of faith, but as a matter of fact.

Innate Idea of God?

I'm not sure I fully agree with the statement that God is an Innate idea that I was aware of as part of my own existence. I can much more readily see God as an idea that would have been either invented by the individual or by coming from another person. Going to Church as a boy was the first time that I learned of this all powerful being, not from me thinking to myself that something all powerful must exist who gave human beings their existence, ability to think, and able to make rational decisions. That he understands 'God' to be a substance that is, among other things, infinite seem odd that shows his own ignorance to even think to apply such a misunderstood property to something.

God's Trustworthiness

I think Descartes is a little quick to decide that God has no reason to deceive him in Meditations. As our 'creator', I think it would be naive to think that we would be exposed to the whole truth of 'God'. Judging my our own meager attempts to become the 'creator' of various entities and life forms, we are especially concerned about fully revealing our imperfections to our creations with the fear that someday these creations might decide to cause us harm. One (of many) ways to prevent such a thing is to not tell our creations the whole truth of any situation but to have such a thing become distorted to our advantage. Something important to keep control of such situations as a creator would be to install rules to ensure you stay in control, Asimov's 3 Rules of Robotics, the 10 Commandments, etc...