Liberal phobia and the cause….

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Good point. And I think more and more of them are supressing their "acloyte-ness" in public, which should result in a major surprise during the next election. I can hardly wait!

(By the way, I don't think he's my Messiah...I just think he's doing a pretty good job, given the conditions, and that he is a good, level-headed PM)

You have a weak leader in Harper, countryboy. After 13 years of Liberal rule by rights Harper should have got a majority. But he is struggling, he is not even sure of getting a minority. As of now, he is running neck and neck with liberals.

Normally when one party has been in power for a long time, the other party comes back roaring. Mulroney got two back to back majorities after a prolonged Liberal rule; Harper is struggling to get even one.

He has not convinced Ontario and Quebec that he deserves majority. And those are the people he has to convince, not Alberta.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Under Liberal government I always lost money either through income tax or investment tax
Under Conservative government I always made money.

Since being retired my income has been pretty much fixed and cashing the same amount of RRSP's every year

Three years ago I received a $300tax refund last year and this year...with the same income and the same tax paid I receive $2000 last year and $2500 this year and they say that conservatives only give tax breaks to the rich......

Will Harper get my vote at the next election?...Hell Yes
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,272
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
Which party killed the bank of Canada and why has it been held down by all the assholes voted in since the bank of Canada was killed?

Do any of you have the slightest clue as to why that happening was the death of democracy in Canada?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,272
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
You have a weak leader in Harper, countryboy. After 13 years of Liberal rule by rights Harper should have got a majority. But he is struggling, he is not even sure of getting a minority. As of now, he is running neck and neck with liberals.
Weak leaders has nothing to do with why Canada is just a polished turd with cracks in the shellac.

It is weak followers that have ****ed this placed up.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
" The difference between Harper and Obama is that Obama inherited more than 500 billion $ deficit, while Harper inherited more than 10 billion $ surplus (which he promptly frittered away)."

On what, exactly, did Harper fritter the money away?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
"We have established that you indeed are a conservative, JLM. You finally admitted that in one of your posts (though it was like pulling teeth to get that admission out of you). "

Actually I'm NOT, but I must admit I am starting to lean that way, since they seem to exhibit more common sense than any other party at the moment. but who knows a week is long time in politics and things could change.
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
You have a weak leader in Harper, countryboy. After 13 years of Liberal rule by rights Harper should have got a majority. But he is struggling, he is not even sure of getting a minority. As of now, he is running neck and neck with liberals.

Normally when one party has been in power for a long time, the other party comes back roaring. Mulroney got two back to back majorities after a prolonged Liberal rule; Harper is struggling to get even one.

He has not convinced Ontario and Quebec that he deserves majority. And those are the people he has to convince, not Alberta.

Well, you might think he's a weak leader, but at least he is one. The poor Liberals have really been dragged through the mud on that subject, and now they have Iggy...who is a pure academic with zero leadership skills and not much of a personality. He consistently appears to be quite uncomfortable in almost any situation. I'm actually starting to feel sorry for them. Almost.

But let's talk about leadership for a minute - It's easy to sit back and shoot at whatever one sees on TV, but my opinion is that anyone who could take 3 political parties (Reform, Alliance, and the PCs) - with all their baggage, history, and problems - and blend it into a single entity, become an effective official opposition party, and then form a minority government in a few short years certainly qualifies as a leader. That is far from being an easy job, although those who have never had to lead can not appreciate that.

Sure, Mr. Harper has made plenty of mistakes but I think he has learned a lot from them and is applying those lessons quite well. The people that think they know everything make me nervous. He has to walk a fine line every day between being a strong leader and being a "dictator." I am sure it drives the opposition parties nuts when he has "muzzled" his people from time to time, but having a communications policy (and enforcing it) can be a sign of a strong leader. And once again, it's a wise thing to do when he is busy sorting out the various talents and strengths within the party, while making sure they don't run head-on into each other in their enthusiasm to do a good job for the citizens of Canada.

I think your assessment of Steve as a "weak leader" is off the mark, and I'm not sure what would drive you to make such a statement. I think he has made giant strides in that area, in spite of big challenges along the way. He has proven to be a competent performer in the international arena.

I certainly don't see anyone as capable as him waiting in the (opposition) wings, and he just keeps gets better every day.
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
Countryboy's post, though i disagree philosophically with some of his assertions, comes the the closest to a cogent argument I've seen on these threads!
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
A conservative, a Harper acolyte voting for Harper. now there is a surprise. And how can you pay investment tax without having an investment income? If you blame Liberals for taking investment tax, shouldn't you also give them credit for you earning the investment income?

And if you had investment income under the Messiah, do you think that you won't have to pay any investment tax?

Anyway, I think this a long time since you have posted any coherent, sensible post, rather than simply gibbering with rage, heckling from the sideline. So congratulations.

Well, I think that post was quite coherent, and factual too. DS quoted specific refund numbers for 3 years, and it didn't sound like "gibbering rage" or "heckling from the sideline" to me.

In fact, you sounded rather desperate in trying to come up with a response. And that doesn't really become a man of your station in life, does it?
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
I think my response was quite cogent. He doesn't mention paying any investment tax under Harper, the clear implication being that he doesn't have any investment income under Harper.

So if Liberals get the blame for making him pay investment tax, isn't it logical that they should also get the credit for creating conditions which enabled him to earn investment income? I would think investment income minus investment tax, he still comes out ahead rather than no investment income and no investment tax.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
No it didn't. Did you see any homosexual groups protest against the show? Whatever humour they had, gays clearly had no problem with it. On the other hand, religious right had a problem with it. Which really bears out what I said, the show was about sex, not sexism. Religious right (and indeed many conservatives) wouldn't have any problem with sexism, but they would have a big problem about sex.

If the show had made fun of homosexuals, religious right wouldn't have any problem with it, gays would have a problem with it. Exactly the opposite happened.

Y'know, I don't recall any protests over that show, either from homosexual groups or the "religious right." I thought it was just a goofy sitcom, made to entertain people.

Jeez, I gotta' quit having so much fun and start focusing on the "dark side" of everything I see so I can have something to bitch and whine about. I feel left out.
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
Isn't that just what I said in my post? That is why I congratulated him.



Oh, I think my response was quite cogent. He doesn't mention paying any investment tax under Harper, the clear implication being that he doesn't have any investment income under Harper.

So if Liberals get the blame for making him pay investment tax, isn't it logical that they should also get the credit for creating conditions which enabled him to earn investment income? I would think investment income minus investment tax, he still comes out ahead rather than no investment income and no investment tax.

No, it's not logical. Decisions on investments and their potential returns usually lie with the investor. You seem to have some sort of a "death wish" in that you heap a lot of responsibility on "the government" for virtually anything that happens, bad or good, and you seem to want more and more of it.

My upbringing was different than yours, I guess - I was taught to make my own decisions, live with the consequences of them, and don't blame others when things go wrong. That could be one of the reasons for my chronic condition known as "Liberalphobia."

Besides, it's a moot point - DS can vote for any party he wishes - for whatever reaons - and your opinion (and mine) don't really matter.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
" The difference between Harper and Obama is that Obama inherited more than 500 billion $ deficit, while Harper inherited more than 10 billion $ surplus (which he promptly frittered away)."

On what, exactly, did Harper fritter the money away?

He frittered away all the surplus in giving tax cuts mainly benefiting the rich. Like the GST cut. Soon after he came to office, there was no budget surplus.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,065
10,993
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Liberal phobia and the cause….

Going forward....& leaving this Goat Rodeo behind, This Thread isn't about a '70's
TV Sitcom. The Thread is titled:

Liberal phobia and the cause….
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Y'know, I don't recall any protests over that show, either from homosexual groups or the "religious right." I thought it was just a goofy sitcom, made to entertain people.

Jeez, I gotta' quit having so much fun and start focusing on the "dark side" of everything I see so I can have something to bitch and whine about. I feel left out.

There were definitely protests from religious right. Now, I couldn't give link to it, but I definitely remember Fundamentalist preachers ranting and raving against the show. According to them, it was a blatant display of sex and sexual innuendos and was not a suitable family entertainment.

Moderator Edit to add:

Going forward....& leaving this Goat Rodeo behind, This Thread isn't about a '70's
TV Sitcom. The Thread is titled:


Liberal phobia and the cause….
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
There were definitely protests from religious right. Now, I couldn't give link to it, but I definitely remember Fundamentalist preachers ranting and raving against the show. According to them, it was a blatant display of sex and sexual innuendos and was not a suitable family entertainment.

Always gotta get in that last word? Maturity a problem?


Moderator Edit to add:
Going forward....& leaving this Goat Rodeo behind, This Thread isn't about a '70's
TV Sitcom. The Thread is titled:


Liberal phobia and the cause….
 
Last edited by a moderator: