Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,976 
November 25th, 2006, 10:12 AM
I'm going to try an new tactic and be blunt, I don't like Harper. Why, well he has an unually large head and ego and since he's been elected as PM he's purdy much ignored what Canadians think or want except Quebec. Most of his policies won't come into effect for years, the increase in Military spending where are the results? I heard lots of promises for this that and the other thing but where's the product???? This article is bang on in my opinion. I've been told by many give him a chance, well I did and I don't like what I see.
P.S. The smilies were insert by moi to express how I feel.
Harper's self-assurance knows no bounds
LAWRENCE MARTIN
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Great leaders, exceptional leaders, put the interests of the country first, their own political interests second. They raise the level of the playing field a few notches above the rugby pitch. They are inclined to that old-fashioned word, statesmanship. That's why they are almost an extinct breed.
Liberal governments didn't offer many such leaders. On naked political opportunism, they often wrote the script. With the ascendancy of the Conservatives of Stephen Harper, there was some hope — though hardly palpable — that there would be a change.
So where do these principled Conservatives stand so far? Are they an inspired group who care as much for the country's wellbeing as their own hides? Or do they more readily fit the categorization of a quick-fix, vote-pandering machine?
The big issues provide some clues.
Québécois as a nation: This was a master Harper stroke that could very well reverse the party's free fall in la belle province. But it is a move fraught with danger for the long term. Though there are no plans to change the Constitution, the nation label is an enduring gift that nationalists can exploit to demand more rights.
GST cuts: As a political weapon, a splendid vote-getter. As for the long-term interests of the country, most every economist turns thumbs down. The GST, created under Brain Mulroney, was the government's cash cow. It fit the global consensus toward consumption taxes as a much preferred alternative to income levies. Turning back the GST is turning back the clock.
Softwood lumber accord: Again, top marks for short-term optics. It showed the Conservatives getting a deal where the Liberals could not. It showed them getting along better with the United States and it avoided a long-term legal wrangle. But it cost a billion dollars, it committed the industry to restricting exports and, worse, it undermined a second major accomplishment of the Mulroney government — the free-trade agreement. The message for the future is that it doesn't pay to heed the NAFTA.
Environmental measures: If the Harper government undercut the Mulroney record on free trade and the GST, it's done it again on the environment. Putting off any strong immediate action to deal with climate change is great for industry and the oil patch and Mr. Harper's Alberta base. But for Canada's long-term interests, the lack of action is a setback. It will create dire pressures down the line.
Afghanistan commitment: Unlike the previous government, this one wanted to be decisive. Rushing into a major extension of the war mission without national discussion or much parliamentary debate accomplished that. But it was like turning into a blind alley. There was no telling, without assurances from other Allies, what it would lead to.
Day care: Throwing money at mothers was another example of a nice short-term political fix. In the long term, an institutionalized system of guaranteed day dare, if properly constituted, might be a better option.
The Harper actions in respect to China and the Middle East, though perhaps more motivated by ideology than political considerations, were other examples of quick decision-making with little regard for long-term consequences.
Minority governments, in order to survive, have to make trade-offs. Allowances should be made for that and there have been some exceptions to the aforementioned list.
But whereas the Mulroney Tories could be said to have been farsighted on some major files, it is hard to find in the Harper mix the same kind of thinking. For this government, it's all politics all the time and damn the land mines that might be stumbled on in the years down the line.
Mr. Harper displays an Olympian self-assurance. He is the master strategist and smugly moves the political pieces in a bid to trump one and all. It is done in peremptory style; the old Reform urges that brought him to Ottawa — democratization and transparency in the system — seem long forgotten. The impression is that he may get around to considering long-term impacts, but only after the protracted political ruminations are complete. In the Commons, his government shows no inclination to ennobling discourse, but only, in the tradition of the Grits, scoring cheap points.
Higher standards might prevail if the media focus was less on the politics of every government action and more on how the decisions affect the wellbeing of the country. It used to be that when politically driven considerations superseded the national interest they were exposed and scorned, not saluted.
The present-day culture feeds the impression that good politics is good governance. Often, the opposite is true. Often, what results is what we may be seeing today — short-term gain for long-term pain. lmartin@globeandmail.com
I'm going to try an new tactic and be blunt, I don't like Harper. Why, well he has an unually large head and ego and since he's been elected as PM he's purdy much ignored what Canadians think or want except Quebec. Most of his policies won't come into effect for years, the increase in Military spending where are the results? I heard lots of promises for this that and the other thing but where's the product???? This article is bang on in my opinion. I've been told by many give him a chance, well I did and I don't like what I see.
P.S. The smilies were insert by moi to express how I feel.
Harper's self-assurance knows no bounds
LAWRENCE MARTIN
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Great leaders, exceptional leaders, put the interests of the country first, their own political interests second. They raise the level of the playing field a few notches above the rugby pitch. They are inclined to that old-fashioned word, statesmanship. That's why they are almost an extinct breed.
Liberal governments didn't offer many such leaders. On naked political opportunism, they often wrote the script. With the ascendancy of the Conservatives of Stephen Harper, there was some hope — though hardly palpable — that there would be a change.
So where do these principled Conservatives stand so far? Are they an inspired group who care as much for the country's wellbeing as their own hides? Or do they more readily fit the categorization of a quick-fix, vote-pandering machine?
The big issues provide some clues.
Québécois as a nation: This was a master Harper stroke that could very well reverse the party's free fall in la belle province. But it is a move fraught with danger for the long term. Though there are no plans to change the Constitution, the nation label is an enduring gift that nationalists can exploit to demand more rights.
GST cuts: As a political weapon, a splendid vote-getter. As for the long-term interests of the country, most every economist turns thumbs down. The GST, created under Brain Mulroney, was the government's cash cow. It fit the global consensus toward consumption taxes as a much preferred alternative to income levies. Turning back the GST is turning back the clock.
Softwood lumber accord: Again, top marks for short-term optics. It showed the Conservatives getting a deal where the Liberals could not. It showed them getting along better with the United States and it avoided a long-term legal wrangle. But it cost a billion dollars, it committed the industry to restricting exports and, worse, it undermined a second major accomplishment of the Mulroney government — the free-trade agreement. The message for the future is that it doesn't pay to heed the NAFTA.
Environmental measures: If the Harper government undercut the Mulroney record on free trade and the GST, it's done it again on the environment. Putting off any strong immediate action to deal with climate change is great for industry and the oil patch and Mr. Harper's Alberta base. But for Canada's long-term interests, the lack of action is a setback. It will create dire pressures down the line.
Afghanistan commitment: Unlike the previous government, this one wanted to be decisive. Rushing into a major extension of the war mission without national discussion or much parliamentary debate accomplished that. But it was like turning into a blind alley. There was no telling, without assurances from other Allies, what it would lead to.
Day care: Throwing money at mothers was another example of a nice short-term political fix. In the long term, an institutionalized system of guaranteed day dare, if properly constituted, might be a better option.
The Harper actions in respect to China and the Middle East, though perhaps more motivated by ideology than political considerations, were other examples of quick decision-making with little regard for long-term consequences.
Minority governments, in order to survive, have to make trade-offs. Allowances should be made for that and there have been some exceptions to the aforementioned list.
But whereas the Mulroney Tories could be said to have been farsighted on some major files, it is hard to find in the Harper mix the same kind of thinking. For this government, it's all politics all the time and damn the land mines that might be stumbled on in the years down the line.
Mr. Harper displays an Olympian self-assurance. He is the master strategist and smugly moves the political pieces in a bid to trump one and all. It is done in peremptory style; the old Reform urges that brought him to Ottawa — democratization and transparency in the system — seem long forgotten. The impression is that he may get around to considering long-term impacts, but only after the protracted political ruminations are complete. In the Commons, his government shows no inclination to ennobling discourse, but only, in the tradition of the Grits, scoring cheap points.
Higher standards might prevail if the media focus was less on the politics of every government action and more on how the decisions affect the wellbeing of the country. It used to be that when politically driven considerations superseded the national interest they were exposed and scorned, not saluted.
The present-day culture feeds the impression that good politics is good governance. Often, the opposite is true. Often, what results is what we may be seeing today — short-term gain for long-term pain. lmartin@globeandmail.com
Super Genius
Posts: 1,274
November 25th, 2006, 08:35 PM
Harper has lots in common with GW Bush, and this big ego, self-assured style is one of them. They probably think they are right no matter what happens...ex: "We were not wrong on global warming or about invading Iraq, its just that [mumble mumble]". Uh huh.
Its typical of these 'christian-corporate conservatives' to just force things thru, to use tactics and trickery, to take advantage of a situation Short term political gain is all it is - Harper wants to run the show a while longer, and if they kept talking about Kyoto and hearing from Rambrose, they would be out before Christmas. So as the world burns, he changes topics. What a jerk.
The Quebec nationhood statement was political games, not heartfelt concern for francophone culture. Gees, how cynical is it for Harper to grant nationhood for people he has probably belittled in private all his life - the oilpatch mentality is generally cynical of Quebec and the oilpatch is where he comes from.
Besides that, the Nationhood statement was wreckless. It will certainly bring an unending string of complications as other groups of people start vying for equality with Quebecors. Natives, for example, deserved that kind of status BEFORE Quebec got it - it is an insult to natives that Quebec was granted Nationhood status before they were. So that has to be next ...
How about the flood of fringe groups - who qualifies for Nationhood everyone? EG - the addicts - they have a distinct culture and form a distinct group. There is a whole town in Italy where addicts can go to live, Vancouver sort of has one in the eastside population. And the Norwegians - how about them? Many towns in Canada bear Norwegian names, and they maintain some of their distinct culture in Canada, with lutefisk and lefse.
I just hope they can get back to global warming soon. Its almost too late.
Harper has lots in common with GW Bush, and this big ego, self-assured style is one of them. They probably think they are right no matter what happens...ex: "We were not wrong on global warming or about invading Iraq, its just that [mumble mumble]". Uh huh.
Its typical of these 'christian-corporate conservatives' to just force things thru, to use tactics and trickery, to take advantage of a situation Short term political gain is all it is - Harper wants to run the show a while longer, and if they kept talking about Kyoto and hearing from Rambrose, they would be out before Christmas. So as the world burns, he changes topics. What a jerk.
The Quebec nationhood statement was political games, not heartfelt concern for francophone culture. Gees, how cynical is it for Harper to grant nationhood for people he has probably belittled in private all his life - the oilpatch mentality is generally cynical of Quebec and the oilpatch is where he comes from.
Besides that, the Nationhood statement was wreckless. It will certainly bring an unending string of complications as other groups of people start vying for equality with Quebecors. Natives, for example, deserved that kind of status BEFORE Quebec got it - it is an insult to natives that Quebec was granted Nationhood status before they were. So that has to be next ...
How about the flood of fringe groups - who qualifies for Nationhood everyone? EG - the addicts - they have a distinct culture and form a distinct group. There is a whole town in Italy where addicts can go to live, Vancouver sort of has one in the eastside population. And the Norwegians - how about them? Many towns in Canada bear Norwegian names, and they maintain some of their distinct culture in Canada, with lutefisk and lefse.
I just hope they can get back to global warming soon. Its almost too late.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,976
November 25th, 2006, 08:40 PM
I throw my hands up in defeat, I don't like the Liberals and their history of do-we-cheat-them-and- how or their choices on a new leader and I don't like Harper and his supposed Con Party cough, what is this Green Party all about? I will never be support the NDP.
I throw my hands up in defeat, I don't like the Liberals and their history of do-we-cheat-them-and- how or their choices on a new leader and I don't like Harper and his supposed Con Party cough, what is this Green Party all about? I will never be support the NDP.
Senate Member
Posts: 5,155 
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
November 25th, 2006, 09:16 PM
Yeah
I do like Harper, but have been disappointed with many things in this administration.
However, I have been pleased with some things beyond my fondest political fantasies.
I am not happy with the death of a bill to de-criminalize marijuana, mandatory sentences in any case, reverse onus, Quebec as a nation, nor the tiny steps made in correcting the Firearms Act. Not at all.
I am very happy with our new attitude towards Israel, to say nothing of China. I am happy with the new aggressive Canadian military, the cut to the GST, softwood lumber deal (best we could get), better relations with the USA, child care money, and the commitment to pay down debt.
I guess I'm more happy than unhappy.
Haven't been able to say that about a gov't since.........I started voting 34 years ago.
You should remember that Lawrence Martin is (I believe) Jean Chretien's biographer, and a untiring defender of Liberals and attacker of Conservatives.
Yeah
I do like Harper, but have been disappointed with many things in this administration.
However, I have been pleased with some things beyond my fondest political fantasies.
I am not happy with the death of a bill to de-criminalize marijuana, mandatory sentences in any case, reverse onus, Quebec as a nation, nor the tiny steps made in correcting the Firearms Act. Not at all.
I am very happy with our new attitude towards Israel, to say nothing of China. I am happy with the new aggressive Canadian military, the cut to the GST, softwood lumber deal (best we could get), better relations with the USA, child care money, and the commitment to pay down debt.
I guess I'm more happy than unhappy.
Haven't been able to say that about a gov't since.........I started voting 34 years ago.
You should remember that Lawrence Martin is (I believe) Jean Chretien's biographer, and a untiring defender of Liberals and attacker of Conservatives.
November 25th, 2006, 09:29 PM
I don't like the GST cut at all. How is a few extra cents here or there going to help anyone out? Maybe if they kept the GST at the 7% and increased GST refunds or something, then I would stand to be able to use the money for something like say textbooks, or groceries. They could have done all sorts of beneficial things with that money. If they want to pay down the debt, use 1/7 of the GST funds, or use it to fix up some of our horrible roads. Or give that portion to cities. Anything but give me an extra penny on the dollar. I can't see this as anything but a vote buying scheme, and all it cost was a penny.
I don't like the GST cut at all. How is a few extra cents here or there going to help anyone out? Maybe if they kept the GST at the 7% and increased GST refunds or something, then I would stand to be able to use the money for something like say textbooks, or groceries. They could have done all sorts of beneficial things with that money. If they want to pay down the debt, use 1/7 of the GST funds, or use it to fix up some of our horrible roads. Or give that portion to cities. Anything but give me an extra penny on the dollar. I can't see this as anything but a vote buying scheme, and all it cost was a penny.
Senate Member
Posts: 5,155
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
November 25th, 2006, 09:34 PM
I like it simply because it was a promise made and kept.
Quoting Tonington
Yeah, I see your point.
I don't like the GST cut at all. How is a few extra cents here or there going to help anyone out? Maybe if they kept the GST at the 7% and increased GST refunds or something, then I would stand to be able to use the money for something like say textbooks, or groceries. They could have done all sorts of beneficial things with that money. If they want to pay down the debt, use 1/7 of the GST funds, or use it to fix up some of our horrible roads. Or give that portion to cities. Anything but give me an extra penny on the dollar. I can't see this as anything but a vote buying scheme, and all it cost was a penny.
I like it simply because it was a promise made and kept.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,274
November 26th, 2006, 07:26 PM
http://www.greenparty.ca/greenvalues...position=115:3
This is from the Green Party website ; links in the left side column have lots more to say.
They have a new leader in Elisabeth May. I have watched Ms May for years, I have read her articles and I think she is golden. I doubt if she could be corrupted, not by money anyhow. Thats how much I trust her. Jack Layton? Ignatief? Harper? - all money people. Ms May is all green, and I support her and her party now.
I was lost last election though, no natioinal leader I felt good about, I felt like you do now. Come to the greens and help stop global warming - nobody else will.
Ms May is my choice as alternative to Harper.
Quoting Sassylassie
I am with you on the frustration. How can we vote Liberal when they never did much at all to show us the 'stealing' would not go on as before [sponsorship prgm]? And the others, naw. Which leaves us with the Greens, and their new leader.
I throw my hands up in defeat, I don't like the Liberals and their history of do-we-cheat-them-and- how or their choices on a new leader and I don't like Harper and his supposed Con Party cough, what is this Green Party all about? I will never be support the NDP.
http://www.greenparty.ca/greenvalues...position=115:3
Quote:
- a full page of details on each of those values at the link
The policies of the Green Party of Canada are founded upon six fundamental principles:
Ecological Wisdom
Social Justice
Participatory Democracy
Non-Violence
Sustainability
Respect for Diversity
Ecological Wisdom
Social Justice
Participatory Democracy
Non-Violence
Sustainability
Respect for Diversity
This is from the Green Party website ; links in the left side column have lots more to say.
They have a new leader in Elisabeth May. I have watched Ms May for years, I have read her articles and I think she is golden. I doubt if she could be corrupted, not by money anyhow. Thats how much I trust her. Jack Layton? Ignatief? Harper? - all money people. Ms May is all green, and I support her and her party now.
I was lost last election though, no natioinal leader I felt good about, I felt like you do now. Come to the greens and help stop global warming - nobody else will.
Ms May is my choice as alternative to Harper.
