Promise Made, Promise Kept....

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Promise Made, Promise

Harper promised to reduce taxes for every Canadian. With the increase in personal income tax on the lowest tax bracket and the decrease in basic personal exemption, many people (myself included) will pay more tax under this conservative government. Promise Broken

Harper promised that his government would hold itself to a higher ethical standard. Promise Broken

Hmmmm...Just got my first cheque after July 1. Less Tax. Less GST. Promise kept.

Harper promised an elected senate, and then appointed an un-elected senator. Promise Broken

But will appoint an elected senator from Alberta. Promise kept as well. Tie goes to the government!!

Haper promised to address the fiscal imbalance, yet his solution is for provinces to raise taxes, as if this is some new and innovative solution. Promise Broken

Fiscal imbalance between the provinces is still in the beginning stages. No promise broken or kept yet.

Harper promised to improve the living conditions of Natives. With the cancellation of the Kelowna Accord, it's hard to see how this is possible. Until Harper does something substantial to improve the living standards of Natives, Promise Broken

The Kelowna accord was a total Liberal propaganda preelection ploy. Wanting accountability in native funding is a great goal. Promise neither kept or broken at this time. Geez, its been five months!!

I admit that Harper has kept a lot of his promises. Unfortunately, many of the promises he has kept I disagree with.

We did not ask if you agreed with them, just that he kept them. I still maintain with the positives coming out of this government, the best is yet to come, even though the first five months have been quite good already. Just as an aside, exactly what promises did Martin ever make that he kept? Oh yeah, hard to keep a promise when you never make any!!!!

 

[bluealberta]

Secondly, your last statement tries to bring up that old hidden agenda crap. Get over that, already, okay? I mean really, if there actually was a hidden agenda, would not Scotty Brison, Belinda Stronach and Keithy Martin have told the rest of the Liberal party by now?

If harper has a hidden agenda, why would Scott Brison et al. know about it? I doubt harper discusses future policies with his entire caucus. For example, did Stronach know that harper was planning to cut the GST? Somehow I doubt it, otherwise the liberals could have used that information for their benefit. The announcement probably wouldn't have had as much impact if it had already been leaked by the liberals. If harper has a hidden agenda, we wouldn't know about it yet. He has a minority government that is trying for a majority. He is smart enough not to do anything to indicate a hidden agenda so long as he only has a minority. Now I'm not saying harper does have a hidden agenda, I'm simply saying that there is no way to know for sure either way.

Brison becoming leader will totally destory the Liberal party!!!

Now there I can agree with you.

The point about the hidden agenda was that it was basically the Liberal platform in the 2004 election, and Scotty, Belinda, and Keithy had all just left the Conservatives, so they should have known about the hidden agenda if it existed. After all, two of the three ran for the leader, so they should have had information about Harpers plans, they campaigned against him!! Second, Stronach was a key part of the CPC party right up until she left for the Libs, so she again should have know about any hidden agenda.

Point being, there is no hidden agenda. The only thing that was hidden was the lying, stealing, and money laundering the Liberals were doing while in power. That, my friend, is beyond debate any more.

 

[bluealberta]

Or we could talk about the promise to exclude resource revenues from the equalization calculations, which is now being spun as just a suggestion for discussion rather than the clear commitment it was in the campaign. This government is no different from any other in the "Promise Made, Promise Kept..." department.

I absolutely do not agree with the promise to exclude resource revenues from the equalization calculations. He only made this promise because he is Albertan. That province owes its very existence to Ontario. That is about all I have to say on the subject.

Then, my friend, you should shut up before you embarass yourself any further. Do your history. Alberta owes NOTHING to Ontario. Any money Alberta ever received has been repaid in the last two decades with exorbitant transfer payments. Get over it, Ontario is no longer the main economic engine of Canada.

You want resource revenues in equalization? Then bring in every resource revenue in Ontario and Quebec as well. Be careful what you wish for, my foolish friend.

 

[gc]

Re: RE: Promise Made, Promise

Harper promised to reduce taxes for every Canadian. With the increase in personal income tax on the lowest tax bracket and the decrease in basic personal exemption, many people (myself included) will pay more tax under this conservative government. Promise Broken

Harper promised that his government would hold itself to a higher ethical standard. Promise Broken

Hmmmm...Just got my first cheque after July 1. Less Tax. Less GST. Promise kept.

You ignored my point. Harper promised that all Canadians would pay less tax. Just because you pay less tax does not mean that all Canadians pay less tax. Promise still broken.

Harper promised an elected senate, and then appointed an un-elected senator. Promise Broken

But will appoint an elected senator from Alberta. Promise kept as well. Tie goes to the government!!

One elected senator and one un-elected senator does not amount to an elected senate. Harper did not promise a half-elected senate.

Haper promised to address the fiscal imbalance, yet his solution is for provinces to raise taxes, as if this is some new and innovative solution. Promise Broken

Fiscal imbalance between the provinces is still in the beginning stages. No promise broken or kept yet.

I guess you missed jim flaherty's statement. He essential said (I'm paraphrasing here) if provinces want to fix the imbalance they should raise their taxes. If this is their only solution then promise broken.

Harper promised to improve the living conditions of Natives. With the cancellation of the Kelowna Accord, it's hard to see how this is possible. Until Harper does something substantial to improve the living standards of Natives, Promise Broken

The Kelowna accord was a total Liberal propaganda preelection ploy. Wanting accountability in native funding is a great goal. Promise neither kept or broken at this time. Geez, its been five months!!

Ok, I'll give him the benfit of the doubt here. 5 months is not enough time to fix the living conditions of Natives....but I'm certainly not holding my breath.

I admit that Harper has kept a lot of his promises. Unfortunately, many of the promises he has kept I disagree with.

We did not ask if you agreed with them, just that he kept them.

I told you all the promises he broke, and only mentioned one sentence where I disagreed with his policies. Can I not write one sentence without being asked to do so?

I still maintain with the positives coming out of this government, the best is yet to come, even though the first five months have been quite good already.

I didn't ask if the first five months have been good, just that he broke his promises. Ok, I'm just kidding here :lol:

Just as an aside, exactly what promises did Martin ever make that he kept? Oh yeah, hard to keep a promise when you never make any!!!!

I'll try to think of some when I have more time. The liberals weren't very good at keeping promises either...but that doesn't mean the conservatives are any different.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

First, compared to his two immediate predecessors, Harper can only be described as honest.

Oh give it time, he hasn't been PM for very long. I doubt he's any more honest than any of the rest of them. See my final sentence below.

Secondly, your last statement tries to bring up that old hidden agenda crap.

No it doesn't; you're just stretching for something to criticize. I don't think there's really a hidden agenda anymore, though I did once, I just think Harper's a control freak whose personality doesn't allow him to really trust his ministers or his caucus. That's really all I said. If there *is* a hidden agenda, Harper doesn't know about it either, though it may be festering away there among the more extremist elements of the party.

I think he brought up the same sex marriage issue, for instance, just as a sop to them: give 'em a chance to rant and bitch for a while then tell 'em to shut up afterwards when they lose. He's not stupid, he knows that's a losing issue. He knows he can't get a majority if those extremist elements come to the fore, they'll scare off every voter but the minority that supports their intemperate views, so he's walking a tightrope with his own party. That's why I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt for a while; there are enough extremist flakes in the party to sabotage him entirely if they get away on him, and deserves at least a chance to prove himself. Not an enviable job he's got, and I think he's done fairly well at it so far. At bottom I believe he's a good and decent man (so was Joe Clark, and look what happened to him), but the exigencies of politics can make fools and liars of the best of us.

 

[#juan]

While we are talking about promises made, and kept.,

has anyone heard anything about the heavy, armed, icebreakers for the north. Seems to me that idea wasn't met with a lot of enthusiasim below the border. I could be wrong, but I expect we've seen the last of that idea.

 

[gc]

If harper has a hidden agenda, why would Scott Brison et al. know about it? I doubt harper discusses future policies with his entire caucus. For example, did Stronach know that harper was planning to cut the GST? Somehow I doubt it, otherwise the liberals could have used that information for their benefit. The announcement probably wouldn't have had as much impact if it had already been leaked by the liberals. If harper has a hidden agenda, we wouldn't know about it yet. He has a minority government that is trying for a majority. He is smart enough not to do anything to indicate a hidden agenda so long as he only has a minority. Now I'm not saying harper does have a hidden agenda, I'm simply saying that there is no way to know for sure either way.

The point about the hidden agenda was that it was basically the Liberal platform in the 2004 election, and Scotty, Belinda, and Keithy had all just left the Conservatives, so they should have known about the hidden agenda if it existed. After all, two of the three ran for the leader, so they should have had information about Harpers plans, they campaigned against him!! Second, Stronach was a key part of the CPC party right up until she left for the Libs, so she again should have know about any hidden agenda.

Point being, there is no hidden agenda. The only thing that was hidden was the lying, stealing, and money laundering the Liberals were doing while in power. That, my friend, is beyond debate any more.

I don't agree with how the Liberals ran their last campaign. They should have focused more on the positives of a Liberal government than a hidden agenda. That much I agree on. The issue of a hidden agenda comes down to trust. What the Liberals were trying to say is do Canadians trust a Harper (majority) government? The issue of trust was also used by the conservatives in the election campaign, i.e. the constant reminder of the sponsorship scandal (which by the way I think is irrelevant given that chretien and gagliano are GONE, quit beating the dead horse). I will give the conservatives credit for at least focusing somewhat on the positive aspects, which is something the Liberals didn't do. I think the Liberals had a lot of good ideas and should have run their campaign on that, not on a hidden agenda. If they had done that, they just might have won the election.

Once again, I must bring up my example of cutting the GST. If Stronach didn't know that Harper was planning on cutting the GST, what makes you think she would have privy to any of Harper's other policies.

 

[EastSideScotian]

RE: Promise Made, Promise

I consider myself a Classic Liberal as well, Meaning iam basicly a Moderate that looks at both sides liberaly.

Harper is pretty sweet deal at the moment though

 

[LittleRunningGag]

RE: Promise Made, Promise

What hidden agenda? Its right in their platform that they want to get rid of same-sex marriage. It doesn't have to be hidden to be wrong.

Anyway, the only thing that I really wanted the Cons to do was fill in the cracks of government ethics. At best what they did was a patch job. A good start, but no where near good enough. Add to that the senate appointment and the media thing... I'm really disappointed.

 

[The conductor]

The wolf in sheep's clothing.
Don't be fooled by this man and his party.
Even though Paul was useless and Jean was crooked.
If you want right wing relgionous crap vote for this party and see what happens.
Give him the majority government. :evil:

 

[bluealberta]

The wolf in sheep's clothing.
Don't be fooled by this man and his party.
Even though Paul was useless and Jean was crooked.
If you want right wing relgionous crap vote for this party and see what happens.
Give him the majority government. :evil:

Okay, I have read a lot of responses to my previous posts. But this one I will quote.

Religion has nothing to do with the vast majority of right wing voters, including me. Personally, I wish this aspect would just disappear, as I am tired of having to defend my right wing viewpoint on a religous basis. I am not particularly religuous, although I do believe in God, etc, as I suspect the vast majority of left wingers do.

Secondly, I grow very tired of left wing and liberal supporters slamming Harper for not keeping all his promises within the first five months of his government. To the Liberal supporters, I say you are nothing if not hypocritical given the lack of promises by the former Liberal governments, let alone trying to keep any commitments. After thirteen years of Liberal rule, it is difficult to change the direction of the country, although I would argue that Harper has done an admirable job of this so far. It takes time to change from a left wing, socialist type of government, to a smaller, conservative type of government, which is why I am willing to give them a chance for now. Keep in mind, and look at my name, I am primarily a supporter of Alberta going it on our own, so I am not a radical conservative supporter. Having said that, I will be the first to go back to supporting Alberta separatism if I think Harper is not doing a good job for Canada first, and Alberta second. Yes, you read that right. I believe in Canada, but I do not believe in Alberta staying in Canada if the left wing, socialist agenda takes hold, which is what was happening under Cretin and Martin. And there are many of us like this in Alberta. In a lot of ways, this government is the last chance for Albertans to remain in Canada unless there is more respect and power given to not only Alberta, but Western Canada in general.

So, while I support Harper, it is under the understanding that he is the best choice of this bunch, and what I have seen so far encourages me, but if he disappoints me, I am outta here.

 

[Simpleton]

I agree. I don't think Mr. Harper has a hidden agenda either. Let's be honest, the Conservative party of Canada, like the former Canadian Alliance party, and its predecessor, the Reform party, have always been very open about their policies. As the Reform party transitioned to the Canadian Alliance party, before finally evolving into the Conservative party of Canada, they dropped many of their early positions on reform. It is these old platform markers that the Liberals highlight as a hidden agenda. The Liberals just refuse to acknowledge that the Conservative party is not the same as the old Reform party.

As for Mr. Harper's government keeping some of its promises, let's keep this in perspective. Mr. Harper's government is a minority government. Not only that, but it is a minority government that was looking like it would never get someone in the Prime Ministers's office. It took a lot of Liberal scandal and corruption, for the Conservative party to even get a shot at governing with a minority.

Mr. Harper is heading up a minority government that has spent a lot of years drooling over what it would be like to be in charge. I'm sure that Mr. Harper's government realizes that many of their plans and objectives will never materialize under a Conservative minority. Bearing this in mind, it would seem a no-brainer to think that the Conservatives would avoid the hotseat at all costs. So I think a more apt title for this thread would have been: Promise kept, majority sought...

 

[bluealberta]

I agree. I don't think Mr. Harper has a hidden agenda either. Let's be honest, the Conservative party of Canada, like the former Canadian Alliance party, and its predecessor, the Reform party, have always been very open about their policies. As the Reform party transitioned to the Canadian Alliance party, before finally evolving into the Conservative party of Canada, they dropped many of their early positions on reform. It is these old platform markers that the Liberals highlight as a hidden agenda. The Liberals just refuse to acknowledge that the Conservative party is not the same as the old Reform party.

As for Mr. Harper's government keeping some of its promises, let's keep this in perspective. Mr. Harper's government is a minority government. Not only that, but it is a minority government that was looking like it would never get someone in the Prime Ministers's office. It took a lot of Liberal scandal and corruption, for the Conservative party to even get a shot at governing with a minority.

Mr. Harper is heading up a minority government that has spent a lot of years drooling over what it would be like to be in charge. I'm sure that Mr. Harper's government realizes that many of their plans and objectives will never materialize under a Conservative minority. Bearing this in mind, it would seem a no-brainer to think that the Conservatives would avoid the hotseat at all costs. So I think a more apt title for this thread would have been: Promise kept, majority sought...

One of the best posts I have read for a long time. Nothing to add, except: RIGHT ON.!!

 

[LittleRunningGag]

Religion has nothing to do with the vast majority of right wing voters, including me. Personally, I wish this aspect would just disappear, as I am tired of having to defend my right wing viewpoint on a religous basis.

Wouldn't it be nice? I am the same way (except for believing in god, but to each his own), I am socially libertarian, fiscally conservative. My problem is that social policy is more important to me than fiscal. As such, I cannot, in good concience, vote Conservative. A vote for the Conservatives is a vote for Conservative social policy. A vote for bigotted government.

It doesn't matter if you or I would like them to drop the religious social agenda. It is there and alway will be. I cannot understand how people can vote for a party so willing to strip the rights of others simply because the Conservatives will give them a tax break.

I live in Calgary. I get the Conservative propaganda (I call him Dave Rutherford :wink. I just don't understand.

 

[SaintLucifer]

Religion has nothing to do with the vast majority of right wing voters, including me. Personally, I wish this aspect would just disappear, as I am tired of having to defend my right wing viewpoint on a religous basis.

Wouldn't it be nice? I am the same way (except for believing in god, but to each his own), I am socially libertarian, fiscally conservative. My problem is that social policy is more important to me than fiscal. As such, I cannot, in good concience, vote Conservative. A vote for the Conservatives is a vote for Conservative social policy. A vote for bigotted government.

It doesn't matter if you or I would like them to drop the religious social agenda. It is there and alway will be. I cannot understand how people can vote for a party so willing to strip the rights of others simply because the Conservatives will give them a tax break.

I live in Calgary. I get the Conservative propaganda (I call him Dave Rutherford :wink. I just don't understand.

Libertarian = complete chaos
therefore
Fascism = anti-Libertarian
therefore
Fascism = order

 

[BitWhys]

I always enjoy the irony of Albertans calling themselves conservatives while they suck on the biggest socialist teet this country has ever seen. good luck with that. :lol:

 

[LittleRunningGag]

Libertarian = complete chaos
therefore
Fascism = anti-Libertarian
therefore
Fascism = order

Okay... And your point? I value personal freedom over social order so your rhetoric is lost on me. 'Facism = order,' is not an arguement in my books.

Here's a question. What happens if a facist gets into power who holds opinions contrary to those you hold. What will you think then? Will you still be so gung-ho about facism? Or only facism if they agree with you on social policy?

See that's the benefit of liberalism, you get to have an opinion. With a facist government it doesn't matter what you think, because if talk about it the government will kill you.

 

[bluealberta]

I always enjoy the irony of Albertans calling themselves conservatives while they suck on the biggest socialist teet this country has ever seen. good luck with that. :lol:

Care to explain that? How exactly do we do that? We give more to Canada than we get in resource revenue, so it would seem to me that the ROC sucks on our tits. Get it right, man, get it right.

 

[missile]

I'm retired and just received news that my next pension cheque will be 14 dollars less than the previous one. It looks like it's only the poorer members of our society are the ones paying the heavier tax burden under the Tories

 

[ol' dawg]

I agree. I don't think Mr. Harper has a hidden agenda either. Let's be honest, the Conservative party of Canada, like the former Canadian Alliance party, and its predecessor, the Reform party, have always been very open about their policies. As the Reform party transitioned to the Canadian Alliance party, before finally evolving into the Conservative party of Canada, they dropped many of their early positions on reform. It is these old platform markers that the Liberals highlight as a hidden agenda. The Liberals just refuse to acknowledge that the Conservative party is not the same as the old Reform party.

As for Mr. Harper's government keeping some of its promises, let's keep this in perspective. Mr. Harper's government is a minority government. Not only that, but it is a minority government that was looking like it would never get someone in the Prime Ministers's office. It took a lot of Liberal scandal and corruption, for the Conservative party to even get a shot at governing with a minority.

Mr. Harper is heading up a minority government that has spent a lot of years drooling over what it would be like to be in charge. I'm sure that Mr. Harper's government realizes that many of their plans and objectives will never materialize under a Conservative minority. Bearing this in mind, it would seem a no-brainer to think that the Conservatives would avoid the hotseat at all costs. So I think a more apt title for this thread would have been: Promise kept, majority sought...

One of the best posts I have read for a long time. Nothing to add, except: RIGHT ON.!!

Well, I think you could have added a HARDY-HAR-HAR too.

If the Cons have a hidden agenda, it will remain hidden until they have a majority. To say it's a hidden agenda means that it is hidden ... not available for public scruntiny. Just because the public doesn't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Actually, Simpleton, I agree with much of your post. The Cons will keep hidden their true agenda until they have a majority, no point in commiting political suicide in your first few months of governing with a minority government. With the confusion in the Liberal Party, and the publics apathy for what the Liberals are doing, I wouldn't be suprised to see a Conservative majority in the next election. Then we will see what they really want to do.

I also agree that the many MPs in the Liberal Party have some morality issues, and don't deserve to be in the position to govern the country. They will have to eliminate the scandalous element, and rebirth themselves to cover the centre position on the political spectrum - leaving the right-wing to the Cons and the left-wing to the NDP.

Personally, I have never voted Reform, Alliance or Conservative, and never will. Like LRG, I live in Calgary, where the Cons publicity machine is always in high gear - not just Dave Rutherford, but both newspapers and all electronic media outlets. It is almost impossible to get a media report of any kind that isn't biased toward the Con viewpoint. This leads to the sheep following the Con partyline because they hear of no other way - there is no balance. Alberta has never struck me as a place for freethinking - and I was born and raised here.

And like missile, I noticed my net income went down this month. Yes, there is the decrease in GST, but if most of your spending is on non-GST items (eg food) then the balance is not offset. Not many seniors on fixed incomes are going to go out and purchase a $60,000 vehicle just so they can save $600.00 GST compared to last month. This is a biased tax change.