Queen Honours Cretien

[AnnaG]

I think we were right to go into Afghanistan, Goober. Taliban (which was sheltering Al Qaeda) needed to be taken out. It was the right decision and it still is.



Hey, nobody said it is easy to balance the budget. Government must take tough decisions, must cause pain if it is going to eliminate the deficit. Chrétien did just the right thing. His detractors speak from both sides of their mouths. If he had not got rid of the deficit, I am sure they would be the first to condemn him as another Mulroney, for not getting rid of the deficit. Since he got rid of the deficit, his critics don’t like the way he did it, big deal. Balancing the budget is a messy, unpleasant, unpopular job. People are going to complain.

Indeed, if people like you didn’t complain as a result of balancing the budget, then one has to wonder, how come he balanced the budget without getting anybody mad at him? Did he really balance the budget, or was it all smoke and mirrors?

So balancing the budget is never pleasant, it is going to make some people mad. But he had the courage to do it, Mulroney didn’t.

And it is nonsense to say that economic recovery had started before Liberals came into power. Kim Campbell wouldn’t answer the simple question ‘what is the deficit’ time and again. Deficit was skyrocketing when Chrétien came to power. I remember when Martin proclaimed that he will balance the budget in a few years, reporters plainly were skeptical, they did not believe him. They kept asking him what happens if he could not balance the budget. To which his confident reply was, ‘we will balance it’.

Economy was very much on life support when Chrétien came to power, he is the one who rescued it. It was not a coincidence that Canadians gave him three back to back majorities.



I did not say that he saved the country. What I said was that he gets some of the credit for saving the country (just as he would get some of the blame if the referendum had gone the other way).

Jokey, that's straight flat out bullshyte. ChRETIeN did sweet bugger all about the budget. Martin did it.
And only a fraction of voters gave him majorities, not all Canadians.
Keep twisting the facts, Peewee, you only show what a fool you are.

Anyway, the Queen honoring ChRETIeN is as much of a joke as would be G. Dumbya getting a humanitarian award.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Please reply on the other points I brought forward - Take your time as I am off to bed - Work starts at 5 am. Enjoy your evening.

I don’t know that there is much to reply, Goober. As to the charges of corruption, I never justified Chrétien’s behaviour on the corruption charges. But my point is that all of them do that to some extent. It is only political opponents of Liberals who will try to crucify them on corruption, same as political opponents of conservatives will try to crucify conservatives on charges of corruption.

That is politics as usual. Each side accuses the other of corruption while minimizing it sow crimes.

 

[pgs]

Theft is not politics as usual.

 

[JLM]

"I think we were right to go into Afghanistan, Goober. Taliban (which was sheltering Al Qaeda) needed to be taken out. It was the right decision and it still is."

It was probably also right for the U.S. to go into Iraq (using that logic) as Saddam was just as if not more formidable than the Taliban.

 

[big]

Big - The Right wing was split - NDP were a joke - only a fufn idiot of a Liberal would have lost - Now I think of Dion.

Politics is precisely to be found in such splits.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"I think we were right to go into Afghanistan, Goober. Taliban (which was sheltering Al Qaeda) needed to be taken out. It was the right decision and it still is."

It was probably also right for the U.S. to go into Iraq (using that logic) as Saddam was just as if not more formidable than the Taliban.

There is no comparison between the two, JLM. Taliban was sheltering Al Qaeda, there was no love lost between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.

Invasion of Afghanistan was justified; invasion of Iraq was totally uncalled for. It was not just a coincidence that USA got worldwide support for the operation in Afghanistan, while it got very little support for the action in Iraq.

 

[AnnaG]

I don’t know that there is much to reply, Goober. As to the charges of corruption, I never justified Chrétien’s behaviour on the corruption charges. But my point is that all of them do that to some extent. It is only political opponents of Liberals who will try to crucify them on corruption, same as political opponents of conservatives will try to crucify conservatives on charges of corruption.

That is politics as usual. Each side accuses the other of corruption while minimizing it sow crimes.

So this makes everything ok. I see. Apologist.

 

[AnnaG]

There is no comparison between the two, JLM. Taliban was sheltering Al Qaeda, there was no love lost between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.

Invasion of Afghanistan was justified; invasion of Iraq was totally uncalled for. It was not just a coincidence that USA got worldwide support for the operation in Afghanistan, while it got very little support for the action in Iraq.

Sort memory? Facts askew?
In January of 2003 action concerning Iraq had 64% of Americans' support plus the support of United Kingdom, Spain, Australia, Poland, Denmark, and Italy.
Canada, France, Germany, and New Zealand opposed invasion.

 

[Cannuck]

It's called splitting hairs. Both governments were supporting terrorists as are other countries. What made Afghanistan different is that they openly admitted it.

People like Joey think it's OK to attack those that admit to the crime but those like Iran's Ahmadickhead should be spared because they are liars.

 

[Goober]

I don’t know that there is much to reply, Goober. As to the charges of corruption, I never justified Chrétien’s behaviour on the corruption charges. But my point is that all of them do that to some extent. It is only political opponents of Liberals who will try to crucify them on corruption, same as political opponents of conservatives will try to crucify conservatives on charges of corruption.

That is politics as usual. Each side accuses the other of corruption while minimizing it sow crimes.

SJP
Questions I asked - you may have overlooked them - As to overlooking corruption - would you do it if it was a right wing evangelist - A Republican - A Conservative - Not a snowballs chance in Hell that you would overlook it - You would have a thread up lickety split - I think you are being highly selective and clearly not objective seeing as you still state you have No Party Affiliation-

I agree with that - Chretien & Martin sent troops poorly equipped -
Check CBC for the list of soldiers killed in Afghanistan - It tells how each one died - the vast majority from roadside IED's - Canada could have procured Choppers - may have taken 6 months - max - But Chretien / Martin did things on the cheap - Soldiers died because of that - same as in Bosnia - But you have strictly avoided answering my questions when I pointed out these facts to you - Do you remember the Medak Pocket - Chretien hushed that up - Canadian soldiers fought and yet many civilians were still murdered by the Croats- But this was anathema to Chretien and Liberals - after all Bosnia was Peacekeeping wasn't it? Blue Berets - soldiers welcomed and handing out chocolate to children - No it was a fukn hell - And yes I lost friends because they had sweet fuk all for equipment -

Budgets - The GST, surplus EI 10's of Billions, transfer of 30 billion from our Pension Funds ( Civil Servant - Military - RCMP)also added - the economy started the turn around before he came to power - He devastated the Military with cuts and had the audacity to send troops with Little equipment to Bosnia and later to Afghanistan - and that was only supposed to be for 6 months if I recall correctly.

You should go back and check the stats - the economy had turned the corner as they say and we Canadian depend upon the US - In particular Ontario. Chretien / Martin had growing revenues and the budget was balanced about 97 - still they cut the Military - still they sent them on missions- still poorly equiped - If you ask someone to put their life on the line and abuse that trust with poor equipment and training then you are also complicit and responsible for their deaths. Agree - Disagree - over to you.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP
Questions I asked - you may have overlooked them - As to overlooking corruption - would you do it if it was a right wing evangelist - A Republican - A Conservative - Not a snowballs chance in Hell that you would overlook it - You would have a thread up lickety split - I think you are being highly selective and clearly not objective seeing as you still state you have No Party Affiliation-

I did not say I overlooked corruption, Goober. What I said was that they all do it, even your beloved Conservatives do it.

SJP
I agree with that - Chretien & Martin sent troops poorly equipped -
Check CBC for the list of soldiers killed in Afghanistan - It tells how each one died - the vast majority from roadside IED's - Canada could have procured Choppers - may have taken 6 months - max - But Chretien / Martin did things on the cheap - Soldiers died because of that - same as in Bosnia - But you have strictly avoided answering my questions when I pointed out these facts to you - Do you remember the Medak Pocket - Chretien hushed that up - Canadian soldiers fought and yet many civilians were still murdered by the Croats- But this was anathema to Chretien and Liberals - after all Bosnia was Peacekeeping wasn't it? Blue Berets - soldiers welcomed and handing out chocolate to children - No it was a fukn hell - And yes I lost friends because they had sweet fuk all for equipment -

As to Afghanistan ,that is only your opinion. As to ‘Croats’, I have no idea what you are talking about.

SJP
Budgets - The GST, surplus EI 10's of Billions, transfer of 30 billion from our Pension Funds ( Civil Servant - Military - RCMP)also added - the economy started the turn around before he came to power - He devastated the Military with cuts and had the audacity to send troops with Little equipment to Bosnia and later to Afghanistan - and that was only supposed to be for 6 months if I recall correctly.

As I said before, balancing budget is not a pleasant task, people are going to be mad. If military is cut (or taxes raised), the right is going to be mad. If programs for the poor are cut, the left is going to be mad. That is just too bad. Deficits must be eliminated, it doesn’t matter who gets mad in the process, right wingers like you or left wingers.

And Chretien didn’t just cut the military, he increased taxes, he cut program for the poor. I think he did just the right thing.

But tell me something, you evidently think that there was a perfect way to balance the budget, without offending anybody. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? What was stopping him?

SJP


You should go back and check the stats - the economy had turned the corner as they say and we Canadian depend upon the US - In particular Ontario. Chretien / Martin had growing revenues and the budget was balanced about 97 -

That is the partisan in you speaking, Goober. If economy was in such an excellent shape, if we had such a paradise under the Tories, why did they get crushed in the election? If Ontario was booming so much under Mulroney, why did Liberals made a clean sweep of Ontario, why did they win each and every seat in Ontario?

I can understand you supporting your party, but facts and figures don’t support that. And let me get this straight, are you complaining because Liberals balanced the budget in 1997, are you saying that they should have done it earlier than that?

Well all I can say is that political partisanship can be amazing (and blind).

 

[big]

If economy was in such an excellent shape, if we had such a paradise under the Tories, why did they get crushed in the election? If Ontario was booming so much under Mulroney, why did Liberals made a clean sweep of Ontario, why did they win each and every seat in Ontario?

I can understand you supporting your party, but facts and figures don’t support that. And let me get this straight, are you complaining because Liberals balanced the budget in 1997, are you saying that they should have done it earlier than that?

Well all I can say is that political partisanship can be amazing (and blind).

Your conception of Canadian leadership doesn't go father than the outdated scapegoating, that is, when things go wrong in our society, our prime minister is responsible, like if the Americans (economy) were not rigging our game. The Queen honoring Chretien is indeed two heads happy to see that they have been left standing by an obsolete scapegoating social mechanism.

 

[Goober]

I did not say I overlooked corruption, Goober. What I said was that they all do it, even your beloved Conservatives do it.



As to Afghanistan ,that is only your opinion. As to ‘Croats’, I have no idea what you are talking about.



As I said before, balancing budget is not a pleasant task, people are going to be mad. If military is cut (or taxes raised), the right is going to be mad. If programs for the poor are cut, the left is going to be mad. That is just too bad. Deficits must be eliminated, it doesn’t matter who gets mad in the process, right wingers like you or left wingers.

And Chretien didn’t just cut the military, he increased taxes, he cut program for the poor. I think he did just the right thing.

But tell me something, you evidently think that there was a perfect way to balance the budget, without offending anybody. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? What was stopping him?



That is the partisan in you speaking, Goober. If economy was in such an excellent shape, if we had such a paradise under the Tories, why did they get crushed in the election? If Ontario was booming so much under Mulroney, why did Liberals made a clean sweep of Ontario, why did they win each and every seat in Ontario?

I can understand you supporting your party, but facts and figures don’t support that. And let me get this straight, are you complaining because Liberals balanced the budget in 1997, are you saying that they should have done it earlier than that?

Well all I can say is that political partisanship can be amazing (and blind).

Quoting Goober



SJPQuestions I asked - you may have overlooked them - As to overlooking corruption - would you do it if it was a right wing evangelist - A Republican - A Conservative - Not a snowballs chance in Hell that you would overlook it - You would have a thread up lickety split - I think you are being highly selective and clearly not objective seeing as you still state you have No Party Affiliation- I did not say I overlooked corruption, Goober. What I said was that they all do it, even your beloved Conservatives do it.Reply - You have certainlt overlooked corruption - As to who is blind and partian - look to yourself

Quoting GooberSJPI agree with that - Chretien & Martin sent troops poorly equipped -Check CBC for the list of soldiers killed in Afghanistan - It tells how each one died - the vast majority from roadside IED's - Canada could have procured Choppers - may have taken 6 months - max - But Chretien / Martin did things on the cheap - Soldiers died because of that - same as in Bosnia - But you have strictly avoided answering my questions when I pointed out these facts to you - Do you remember the Medak Pocket - Chretien hushed that up - Canadian soldiers fought and yet many civilians were still murdered by the Croats- But this was anathema to Chretien and Liberals - after all Bosnia was Peacekeeping wasn't it? Blue Berets - soldiers welcomed and handing out chocolate to children - No it was a fukn hell - And yes I lost friends because they had sweet fuk all for equipment - As to Afghanistan ,that is only your opinion. As to ‘Croats’, I have no idea what you are talking about.



Reply - No idea about the Croats - Exactly - Chretien and his minions hid this from Canadians- They wanted to have Canadians think that BIH was a true Blue beret Peacekeeping mission - When Gen Lew Mackenzie took command in Sarajevo- he went world wide with interviews - I can see Liberals choking on their breakfast as he laid out the truth - But because he like Hillier was popular - they had little choice but to choke and swallow their eggs BenedictReply - it was all over the news - CBC included as to why the Chretien Govt hid this from the Public - The UN issued a commendation for all troops involved - Where were you - hiding from any criticism of Chretien or totally ignoring it - One or the other - but it is one or the other Quoting Goober

SJP Budgets - The GST, surplus EI 10's of Billions, transfer of 30 billion from our Pension Funds ( Civil Servant - Military - RCMP)also added - the economy started the turn around before he came to power - He devastated the Military with cuts and had the audacity to send troops with Little equipment to Bosnia and later to Afghanistan - and that was only supposed to be for 6 months if I recall correctly.
As I said before, balancing budget is not a pleasant task, people are going to be mad. If military is cut (or taxes raised), the right is going to be mad. If programs for the poor are cut, the left is going to be mad. That is just too bad. Deficits must be eliminated, it doesn’t matter who gets mad in the process, right wingers like you or left wingers.Reply - I am definably not a right winger - unless that is your description of someone that holds all - and I mean all politicians to account - You are so liberal in your support yet still have the audacity to lie to others that you have No Party Affiliation - Jesus - what a load of BSA

nd Chretien didn’t just cut the military, he increased taxes, he cut program for the poor. I think he did just the right thing.

Reply - Sending Soldiers poorly equipped to the death - you justify that - How as I asked that question directly - Is that how you balance a budget - by sending troops to die so that you can say - well Canada is there - Well answer the dammed question - be honest for a change -

But tell me something, you evidently think that there was a perfect way to balance the budget, without offending anybody. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? What was stopping him?


Reply - I did not say that their was a perfect way - you did - you ignore that the deficit was over in 97 -

 

[big]

Reply - Sending Soldiers poorly equipped to the death...


Reply - I did not say that their was a perfect way - you did - you ignore that the deficit was over in 97 -

- Concerning wars, no piece of equipment replaces a will to win.

- Concerning the deficit, it was simply shoveled onto the provinces.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

- Concerning wars, no piece of equipment replaces a will to win.

- Concerning the deficit, it was simply shoveled onto the provinces.

Really big? Evidently you seem to think it is very easy to get rid of the deficit. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? Why didn’t Bush do it in USA? Why isn’t Harper doing it (all he has to do is to pass it on to the provinces)?

Or is it only liberals who know how to pass it on the provinces (in Canada) and to the states (in USA, presumably you would claim that is what Clinton did, that is how he got rid of the deficit). Do the conservatives lack the know-how to do it?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Quoting Goober

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/canadian-politics/87423-queen-honours-cretien.html#post1165987Reply - Sending Soldiers poorly equipped to the death - you justify that - How as I asked that question directly - Is that how you balance a budget - by sending troops to die so that you can say - well Canada is there - Well answer the dammed question - be honest for a change -

And you know that, how? Are you an expert in military matters? Or have you been reading conspiracy theorists?

If Chretien sent Canadian soldiers to death knowingly (as you seem to imply), do you suppose the opposition would have kept quiet about it for even a minute? Conservatives, NDP would have raised merry Hell about it. Newspapers would be full of nothing else but how the PM knowingly sent Canadian soldiers into battle to a certain death. Gomery inquiry would have paled in comparison.

But evidently the opposition had more sense than that, they knew they could not make such a preposterous accusation stick.

Do you suppose Canadians would have given Chretien three back to back majorities, knowing that he deliberately sent Canadian soldiers to die?

You have evidently been reading conspiracy theorists.

 

[Cannuck]

That is the partisan in you speaking, Goober. If economy was in such an excellent shape, if we had such a paradise under the Tories, why did they get crushed in the election? If Ontario was booming so much under Mulroney, why did Liberals made a clean sweep of Ontario, why did they win each and every seat in Ontario?

That is the partisan in you speaking, Joey. The Conservatives were leading in the polls during that campaign. Their defeat had nothing to do with the economy or Mulroney as difficult as it is for you to accept.

 

[FiveParadox]

Members should perhaps be reminded that the decisions of The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien P.C., O.M., C.C., Q.C., the 20th Prime Minister of Canada to launch these armed interventions, were entirely supported by The Honourable Stockwell Day P.C., M.P. (Okanagan—Coquihalla), then the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and later The Right Honourable Stephen Harper P.C., M.P. (Calgary Southwest), as Leader of the Canadian Alliance. Mr. Harper didn’t seem to have a problem with sending the Canadian Forces for that cause, so it’s odd that any conservatives here would suggest that Mr. Chrétien was negligent for having done so.

The fact is that Canadians supported Mr. Chrétien’s strong leadership enough to give the Liberal Party three majority terms as Her Majesty’s Government for Canada, helping to shape much of what Canadians are proud of today. We can only hope that at some moment very soon, Canadians open their eyes and realise what a mistake has been made by allowing Mr. Harper to hold the reins of government for as long as he already has. The prime minister’s recent trip to Rideau Hall to demand a “do-over” of the Governor General of Canada should make it obvious enough to all Canadians that the Conservative Party of Canada is more ready than ever to return to the opposition benches of the House.

Canadians should be extremely proud to have Mr. Chrétien join the prestigious ranks of the Order of Merit; it should be remembered that there are only twenty-four members at a time, so to have a Canadian amongst its ranks is very exciting and a source of patroitism and pride. I appreciate the fantastic work that Mr. Chrétien has done for national unity, for the patriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982, for the enshrining of rights and freedoms, and for the progressive work that the former Government had done for Canadians during its golden decade.

 

[Cannuck]

Members should perhaps be reminded that the decisions of The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien P.C., O.M., C.C., Q.C., the 20th Prime Minister of Canada to launch these armed interventions, were entirely supported by The Honourable Stockwell Day P.C., M.P. (Okanagan—Coquihalla), then the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and later The Right Honourable Stephen Harper P.C., M.P. (Calgary Southwest), as Leader of the Canadian Alliance. Mr. Harper didn’t seem to have a problem with sending the Canadian Forces for that cause, so it’s odd that any conservatives here would suggest that Mr. Chrétien was negligent for having done so.

That would be Conservatives (as opposed to conservatives).

 

[L Gilbert]

Members should perhaps be reminded that the decisions of The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien P.C., O.M., C.C., Q.C., the 20th Prime Minister of Canada to launch these armed interventions, were entirely supported by The Honourable Stockwell Day P.C., M.P. (Okanagan—Coquihalla), then the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and later The Right Honourable Stephen Harper P.C., M.P. (Calgary Southwest), as Leader of the Canadian Alliance. Mr. Harper didn’t seem to have a problem with sending the Canadian Forces for that cause, so it’s odd that any conservatives here would suggest that Mr. Chrétien was negligent for having done so.

The fact is that Canadians supported Mr. Chrétien’s strong leadership enough to give the Liberal Party three majority terms as Her Majesty’s Government for Canada, helping to shape much of what Canadians are proud of today. We can only hope that at some moment very soon, Canadians open their eyes and realise what a mistake has been made by allowing Mr. Harper to hold the reins of government for as long as he already has. The prime minister’s recent trip to Rideau Hall to demand a “do-over” of the Governor General of Canada should make it obvious enough to all Canadians that the Conservative Party of Canada is more ready than ever to return to the opposition benches of the House.

Canadians should be extremely proud to have Mr. Chrétien join the prestigious ranks of the Order of Merit; it should be remembered that there are only twenty-four members at a time, so to have a Canadian amongst its ranks is very exciting and a source of patroitism and pride. I appreciate the fantastic work that Mr. Chrétien has done for national unity, for the patriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982, for the enshrining of rights and freedoms, and for the progressive work that the former Government had done for Canadians during its golden decade.

Sorry, 5P, but you are just as wrong as Jokey. Only the majority of the voters that showed up to vote gave the crook a majority. There's a huge difference between that and Canadians period. And that means that Ontario and Quebec voted to crook in. And that means that ON and QC don't care if the PM is a crook or not which says something about their principles. Crime pays, especially if you are ChRETIeN.