A different way of judging Chretien.

[MMMike]

Mike, I can only guess you are a Harper fan

You might even be a Mulroney fan, I don't know. What I did was to compare all the moaning and whining about the sponsership scandal but I don't hear anyone complain about the debt Mulroney added fifty billion to every year he was in office. Personally, I would rather have a sponsership scandal every year and have no debt.

What does that have to do with the sponsership scandal? I'm not saying that one is worse than the other, I'm simply stating the obvious: that this 'program' was a massive waste of taxpayer money, and a great way for Liberals and their corporate friends to skim a little off the top.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I'm simply stating the obvious: that this 'program' was a massive waste of taxpayer money

That's not true. Separatist sentiment shrank over the life of the program. That would inidcate that it was doing what it was designed to do.

Shiva is right, and it's a point I've made before. A program, whether you believe in it or not, is not crooked or a waste of money if it does what it set out to do. Even if the program fails, that does not indicate that it was designed to crooked.

How come every entrepreneur on the planet accept failure as part of the reality of trying, but governments are not allowed to have programs that fail?

 

[MMMike]

I'm simply stating the obvious: that this 'program' was a massive waste of taxpayer money

That's not true. Separatist sentiment shrank over the life of the program. That would inidcate that it was doing what it was designed to do.

Shiva is right, and it's a point I've made before. A program, whether you believe in it or not, is not crooked or a waste of money if it does what it set out to do. Even if the program fails, that does not indicate that it was designed to crooked.

How come every entrepreneur on the planet accept failure as part of the reality of trying, but governments are not allowed to have programs that fail?

:roll: Crime rates really dropped during the life of the program too, Rev. The sponsership program cause that too? Relation does not automatically imply causation. You actually believe the program was set up to boost the no side? I believe the whole intent of the program was to strengthen the coffers of the liberal party and their friends. Not the first time they have confused what is good for the Party and what is good for the Country.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: A different way of ju

What you believe is not borne out by the facts, MMMikey. Gomery did not find that the program was designed to provide illicit funds to the Liberal Party. As for your crack about crime rates, the program was not designed to address those. It was designed to address and reduce separatist sentiment. It seems to have done that.

If you want to bitch about the corruption, please do so. Don't confuse that with legitimate government programs though.

Since we're on the topic of corruption, have you heard Harper's new plan? How does he reconcile that with taking the government to court so that his corporate buddies could continue to run third party advertisements? Does anybody actually believe Harper on this? Isn't it Conservatives who are always bitching about flip-flops? Is this a flip-flop or just another Conservative lie...another attempt at Conservative corruption?

 

[#juan]

Rev wrote: How come every entrepreneur on the planet accept failure as part of the reality of trying, but governments are not allowed to have programs that fail?

Most certainly Rev, government programs can fail; Look a Mulroney's budgets. MMM's conception of "massive waste" is a little shakey. "Massive waste" is Mulroney spending forty or fifty billion more than he was taking in, for nine years in a row. The PQs were spending taxpayer's money on adds for their side of the referendum. The federal Liberal government followed suit. I might have done the same thing in a similar situation. I don't know.

 

[MMMike]

Rev wrote: How come every entrepreneur on the planet accept failure as part of the reality of trying, but governments are not allowed to have programs that fail?

Most certainly Rev, government programs can fail; Look a Mulroney's budgets. MMM's conception of "massive waste" is a little shakey. "Massive waste" is Mulroney spending forty or fifty billion more than he was taking in, for nine years in a row. The PQs were spending taxpayer's money on adds for their side of the referendum. The federal Liberal government followed suit. I might have done the same thing in a similar situation. I don't know.

Don't confuse fiscal irresponsibility with waste. Maybe Mulroney's billions were both, but thats another discussion. You'll never catch me cheering for a deficit, no matter what the spending was on.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: A different way of ju

I really don't think it was a bad idea at all. Most governments in most countries spend at least some taxpayer money on promoting nationalism. Why is it a crime here in Canada?

While we're on the topic, how much did Mulroney spend on Meech Lake?

 

[LeftCoast]

RE: A different way of ju

I guess another way of looking at it is that we have spent now (I think) $80M to investigate how $355M was spent.

 

[#juan]

As near as I can tell, Meech lake set the country back close to half a billion dollars. It's okay though, Mulroney just hid the costs in the deficit, what's another half billion? :wink: