Question about Harper's honesty.

[Machjo]

Any reasonable voter knows that when a politician stands up and makes a 'promise' it's a promise of intention. They can't foresee every possible issue. They can't tell what might go wrong.

I understand that. He made a promise of intention, now he doesn't intend to do it. No he can't foresee, but then he shouldn't make such an explicit promise that he'll rule out deficit spending no matter what. That's my point. The other leaders acknowledged that under certain conditions, deficits might be necessary.

 

[Nuggler]

There's no questioning Harpo's honesty. He's a slimy lying prick, just like Cretien was, and 'the chin' afore him.

:angry3:

 

[lone wolf]

Really, Harper doesn't have a choice in the matter - unless he wants to make Canada the next Burma. (sh)It happens, and twice as hard on liars. Harper's just caught up with him. Watch the eyes next news conference. They tick over faster than a Richard Nixon watch....

 

[Ron in Regina]

Question about Harper's honesty

Source: Growth package will put Canada deeper in deficit

As the National Post reported earlier this week, a large chunk of any stimulus package will go toward worker re-training so that unemployed workers can find new skills to get new jobs.

Harper said the stimulus package will not be used to simply boost the amount of money those receiving unemployment insurance cheques will get.

“We are not interested in paying people not to work,” Harper said.


The Head of any Political Party (ANY Political Party) in order to claw their way to
the top of the pile, will have traits that you wouldn't want in your neighbour or
your babysitter. Politicians are generally not renown for their honesty. Any of
them....

 

[JLM]

Source: Growth package will put Canada deeper in deficit

As the National Post reported earlier this week, a large chunk of any stimulus package will go toward worker re-training so that unemployed workers can find new skills to get new jobs.

Harper said the stimulus package will not be used to simply boost the amount of money those receiving unemployment insurance cheques will get.

“We are not interested in paying people not to work,” Harper said.


The Head of any Political Party (ANY Political Party) in order to claw their way to
the top of the pile, will have traits that you wouldn't want in your neighbour or
your babysitter. Politicians are generally not renown for their honesty. Any of
them....

Exactamente.

 

[Risus]

:lol:......Well, Mulroo promised no free trade.

Go figure.

Actually he did run on the fact that there would be a free trade agreement...

 

[Risus]

There is no 'absence of a coalition'. The threat will hang over their heads now, no matter what the coalition does. The Liberals and NDP have pulled the strings, and will expect the Conservative budget to reflect their desires, whether they form a formal coalition or not. Harper has no real choice in the matter.

Any reasonable voter knows that when a politician stands up and makes a 'promise' it's a promise of intention. They can't foresee every possible issue. They can't tell what might go wrong.

The problem is Harper is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, in the eyes of the liberal and ndp pions...

 

[Machjo]

Source: Growth package will put Canada deeper in deficit

As the National Post reported earlier this week, a large chunk of any stimulus package will go toward worker re-training so that unemployed workers can find new skills to get new jobs.

Harper said the stimulus package will not be used to simply boost the amount of money those receiving unemployment insurance cheques will get.

“We are not interested in paying people not to work,” Harper said.


The Head of any Political Party (ANY Political Party) in order to claw their way to
the top of the pile, will have traits that you wouldn't want in your neighbour or
your babysitter. Politicians are generally not renown for their honesty. Any of
them....

I read the article, and certainly agree that a good chunk of the stimulous package ought to go towards worker retraining so that they'll be ready for the new jobs that will come after the recession. And yes all successful politicians are liars.

But guess what; it's our fault. We tolerate it.

 

[Machjo]

I should say though that Harper is acting like a dictator. In the same article quoted above, he states that if he falls in a vote of non-confidence, he'll 'have no choice' (bull sh*t) but to call an election, because the Canadian people never forted for a calition. Well I have news for you Harper, we never voted for your government either. We voted for a parliament. And in that sense, any group of MPs could legitimately form a government, King Harper. Why the hell is he misrepresenting the constitution and manipulating public opinion for his own politicla gain. The man pretends to love Canada, and yet uses Canada and misrepresents its constitution to his own ends. No shame in the guy.

Anyone who knows the constitution also knows that we don't vote for a government. We don't vote a party. We vote for an MP, and that's it. Beyond that, any group of MP's capable of getting the support of a majority of the house can form a government. To misrepresent that is dishonest, scary, and dare I say treasonous.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Anyone who knows the constitution also knows that we don't vote for a government. We don't vote a party. We vote for an MP, and that's it. Beyond that, any group of MP's capable of getting the support of a majority of the house can form a government. To misrepresent that is dishonest, scary, and dare I say treasonous.

Yeah, I find his behaviour to be extremely deplorable, but even more so the cons that voted for him backing him up on it...what happened to the accountability plank of the conservative platform...why are the con voters not crucifying him for this?

Let's suppose for a minute that the Cons and the rest of Parliament are playing a football game for the Grey Cup.

The game is tied in the 4th Quarter with 2 seconds left. Parliament has the ball at the 50 yard line and the QB snaps the ball just before the whistle blows. Dion catches the ball in the end zone for the winning TD and there is much jubilation and ass-patting.

But then the Cons refuse to relinquish the Cup because they say that it doesn't matter that the ball was in the air, that the whistle blew while the ball was in play so the TD doesn't count.

The referees and officials uphold Parliament's win, but the Cons say that they are going to have to start the entire season over again to determine who the actual winner of the game was.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Come on, a coalition deficit would be triple anything of Harper's. Those guys would have to fall over themselves with buckets of money paying off friends in high places to stay together.

Upon whose economic projection are you basing this dire warning?

 

[lone wolf]

The problem is Harper is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, in the eyes of the liberal and ndp pions...

Don't you mean in the eyes of the people who actually have to work for a living? Lords, ladies and money players don't give a damn for huddled masses ... until they want the grass cut.

 

[JLM]

The problem is Harper is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, in the eyes of the liberal and ndp pions...

Good point, Risus.

 

[Machjo]

I'm neither Liberal nor NDP. I tend to be economically conservative but socially progressive. But as for this, I would be criticizing any party. The point is the other parties never promised no deficit. Honestly, i still think there are alternatives to a deficit, but if he's going to deficit spend, then he's been dishonest.

What do we not understand about this? Has nothing to do with right wing left wing or which party. It's just plain honesty.

 

[Unforgiven]

The problem is Harper is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, in the eyes of the liberal and ndp pions...

Who isn't? No matter what they do, partisan hacks gripe about it as though it was the worse possible thing in the world to do.

Of course that is balanced by partisan hacks that should a party adopt a policy of killing the first born child of every family in the land, that it's the right thing to do. Like jumping off a bridge because your friend does,

Few Canadians can manage to take a step without being lead by the nose. Yet defend that position with righteous anger should it come to be pointed out at anytime.

 

[JLM]

Who isn't? No matter what they do, partisan hacks gripe about it as though it was the worse possible thing in the world to do.

Of course that is balanced by partisan hacks that should a party adopt a policy of killing the first born child of every family in the land, that it's the right thing to do. Like jumping off a bridge because your friend does,

Few Canadians can manage to take a step without being lead by the nose. Yet defend that position with righteous anger should it come to be pointed out at anytime.

Yep, I see nothing more fickle than partisan politics, like they each think they are God, instead of just a bunch of third rate crooks and very nearly a carbon copy of the other crooks they condemn. I was guilty of it myself and it took me about 25 years to see the light- none of these bastards going to help you, unless it's part and parcel to stuffing their own pockets.

 

[JLM]

There's no questioning Harpo's honesty. He's a slimy lying prick, just like Cretien was, and 'the chin' afore him.

:angry3:

When you attack people in such a way all your own credibility goes completely down the drain.

 

[mit]

It will be interesting to see what ideas Harper's council on the economy come up with. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Jimmy Pattison gives his opinions in closed door with the PM and Mr Flatulence.

 

[pegger]

The problem with Canadian politics right now is that you can't have a "rational" discussion about it.

I don't like Harper because (historically) I don't agree with his major policies - I disagreed with not taxing ITs, fixed election dates (this was just palin stupid in a parliamentary democracy), "tinkering" fixing with the Senate (overhaul it, scrap it, but don't tinker with it), and cutting the GST (income taxes are more effective - but cutting the GST is "sexier" and panders to his base which hates sale taxes)

Because of these reasons I didn't vote for him 2 elections ago. I voted Green as a protest vote against the Liberals, and could not vote for the Conservatives because I did not like his platform. I was happy that he won a minority, as I hoped this could show-case what he could do, and if he did well, I would vote for him next time.

In those years since then, he's reneged on ITs (while I agree with taxing them, he broke his word on them), passed the fixed date law, and then ignored the spirit of it, picked assinine fights with public servants (i.e. the whole Chalk river thing), I did not like his style of attacking Dion the second the guy got the Lib Leadership, didn't like that he muzzled his MPs, a handbook on shutting down parliamentary committees, etc...

Also, not releasing a platform until after the debates, and denying that a recession was coming left me with no choice but to vote Liberal (and I blame Harper for that).

Since then he has reneged on not running a deficit, caused a parliamentary, constitutional and unity crisis on a fiscal update that has since been proven to be complete and total BS, lied about being willing to work in a coalition, and tried to cancel the $1.95 per vote (which benefits the other parties) while NOT touching the lucrative tax write offs that donations get (which benefit the CPC more) - and then claimed that this is the fair thing to do - all this solidified my position that I will never for the CPC so long as Harper remains leader.

I don't consider myself a partisan - however I am finished voting for parties and leaders that lie and get away with it. I will vote Liberal - as realistically that is the only way to defeat Harper. If Iggy wins, and turns out to be as much as a self serving lying SOB that Harper is, I will vote Conservative. To continuously re-elect these SOBs that lie to us is why we have the dysfunctional, useless system we have now.

 

[Machjo]

I don't consider myself a partisan - however I am finished voting for parties and leaders that lie and get away with it. I will vote Liberal - as realistically that is the only way to defeat Harper. If Iggy wins, and turns out to be as much as a self serving lying SOB that Harper is, I will vote Conservative. To continuously re-elect these SOBs that lie to us is why we have the dysfunctional, useless system we have now.

You see, this is the problem with strategic voting. If the Conservatives cheat, you vote Liberal, and if the Liberals cheat, you vote Conservative. Many are like you, and the Liberals and conservatives aren't stupid. They know that as long as people vote strategically, all they have to do is wait awhile before the pendulum swings their way again, no sweat off their backs. What we have to do is stop voting for the party and start voting for the candidate. If we do that, then we're making things less certain for all parties, keeping them on their toes. After all, if a candidate knows that you voted for him based on his personal character, then he'll know that if he wants your vote come next election, he'd better vote on his principles and not along party lines. Once that happens, party strength diminishes. In addition to this, if you're voting for the candidate rather than the party, then even an independent candidate stands a chance. At that point, the party system collapses and MP's have no more choice but to all stay on their toes.

But as long as we keep voting in a Liberal/Conservative seesaw fashion, they'll just keep laughing in our faces... and rightly so. We deserve it. We get the government we deserve.