October 2007 monthly deficit cause for alarm?

[Argus]

I thought the Tories said the cops were in on it with the Liberals.

I don't know what the Tories said. However, I agree that the senior ranks of the RCMP had been thoroughly corrupted by the Liberal Party - so thoroughly corrupted they allowed themselves to be used as party enforcers to intimidate and harass those who offended Chretien.

[Argus]

Maybe if they get caught stealing *more than* $1.14 Million they will admit their mistakes.

It was a culture of entitlement that lasted for too long and has thankfully come to an end.

You are mistaken. That culture is still thoroughly inbred within all the senior ranks of the Liberal Party. All the same people are in charge. Dion was Chretien's Quebec lieutenant, after all. I would expect a Liberal victory to result in an immediate return to graft and corruption and vote buying.

[Argus]

I thought Mulroney was a Tory.

The allegations against Mulroney are that he took money from a foreigner.

The proven facts are that the Liberals took money from the taxpayers.

[jdobbin]

Regardless, is the monthly deficit a cause for alarm ?

A: NO

Was this title offensive?

A: imho NO

The word "alarm" was not put there by me.

My original title was "Tory budget slips into deficit...for the first time in 2007". That title drew complaint and I added the date "October" as per Bloomberg and Reuters reports.

The title was changed to what it is now without notice. I haven't heard from the moderator in quite some time although I said I was getting just as many complaints based on a title I did not write.

[jdobbin]

The allegations against Mulroney are that he took money from a foreigner.

The proven facts are that the Liberals took money from the taxpayers.

For which an inquiry was order by Liberals. When will Harper order an inquiry to assess whether the Mulroney allegations are correct or not?

[Argus]

You might be right that Walkerton might have happened to anyone. David Peterson said as much. But with all things, the buck has to stop somewhere.

Exactly why the buck stops with Chretien and Martin for so many of the deaths of our people in Afghanistan. It was Chretien and Martin who came up with the political ploy of opposing necessary helicopter purchases. And it was those two who starved the military for years, despite huge budgetary surpluses, then sent them into combat with no helicopters and with second rate equipment. How many Canadian soldiers died because of those men?

[jdobbin]

Exactly why the buck stops with Chretien and Martin for so many of the deaths of our people in Afghanistan. It was Chretien and Martin who came up with the political ploy of opposing necessary helicopter purchases. And it was those two who starved the military for years, despite huge budgetary surpluses, then sent them into combat with no helicopters and with second rate equipment. How many Canadian soldiers died because of those men?

It was Mulroney who sold the heavy lift helicopters to the Dutch who now use them in Afghanistan to wave to the Canadian troops below. How many troops have died because of Harper's good friend Mulroney?

Edited December 24, 2007 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

I don't know what the Tories said. However, I agree that the senior ranks of the RCMP had been thoroughly corrupted by the Liberal Party - so thoroughly corrupted they allowed themselves to be used as party enforcers to intimidate and harass those who offended Chretien.

I think I heard this sort of accusation about the Tories using the RCMP to kneecap the Martin campaign.

[jdobbin]

Irrelevent. The system was working. It took an active conspiracy to fool it. The same situation today would result in no different circumstances.

Are you suggesting that because Martin was a weak leader who couldn't make decisions people won't mind Dion - another weakling who can't make decisions?

Why don't the Liberals have anyone who is intelligent, honest, and capable in their senior ranks? Or is it that such people have no place in that party?

You might have thought it irrelevant but the electorate certainly didn't.

I'm suggesting that people thought Harper was a weak leader when in Opposition. Being Prime Minister changes that perception.

It is your opinion that the Liberal party doesn't have intelligent and honest people in the senior ranks. There must be something that appeals to the electorate with the Liberals 2 points up on the Tories.

[Argus]

For which an inquiry was order by Liberals. When will Harper order an inquiry to assess whether the Mulroney allegations are correct or not?

An inquiry was ordered by Liberals? Let's be honest and say that Martin had no choice, and ordered an inquiry for a distant date in the presumption he would be in a new majority government by the time that inquiry met and released any information.

There was a House committee hearing into sponsorgate and the Liberals played a lot of political and technical games to keep any of the principal players from testifying. When they ran out of games they unceremoniously closed out the hearings and declared that nothing illegal had happened. Then they went to an election.

The allegations against Mulroney do not appear to concern most Canadians today, and are, moreover, a decade and a half old. Hardly the same thing as allegations of mass corruption by a sitting government.

I don't think anyone really cares except for the morally bankrupt opposition which is desperate to somehow find a link between Mulroney and the present government so they can smear people.

[jdobbin]

An inquiry was ordered by Liberals? Let's be honest and say that Martin had no choice, and ordered an inquiry for a distant date in the presumption he would be in a new majority government by the time that inquiry met and released any information.

There was a House committee hearing into sponsorgate and the Liberals played a lot of political and technical games to keep any of the principal players from testifying. When they ran out of games they unceremoniously closed out the hearings and declared that nothing illegal had happened. Then they went to an election.

The allegations against Mulroney do not appear to concern most Canadians today, and are, moreover, a decade and a half old. Hardly the same thing as allegations of mass corruption by a sitting government.

I don't think anyone really cares except for the morally bankrupt opposition which is desperate to somehow find a link between Mulroney and the present government so they can smear people.

I think Martin could have brushed it aside. Seems to have worked for Chretien.

The public seems to feel that Mulroney was corrupt and a slight majority of them don't think an inquiry is needed to prove that to them.

[Argus]

I think I heard this sort of accusation about the Tories using the RCMP to kneecap the Martin campaign.

No one has ever been able to suggest a plausible reason why the RCMP commissioner, a noted Liberal Party lackey, would deliberately make decisions detrimental to their well-being based on some kind of strange, alleged desire to see the Tories in power.

However, there is no disputing the fact that the PMO siced the RCMP on Francois Beaudoin, the fired head of the Business Development Bank after he spilled the beans about Chretien pressuring him to give taxpayers money to Chretien's business partner (a criminal who never paid back a dime). The judge in the case which looked at the harrassment was amazed the RCMP lent itself to such behaviour, repeatedly raiding his home and cottage in company with bank lawyers, and trying to persuade the provincial crown to lay charges against him.

Imagine. In this very country, the federal police force, at the behest of the country's political leaders tried to have an honest man imprisoned for causing political trouble for the Prime Minister.

I think that speaks volumes about Chretien's commitment to freedom and human rights.

And Dion was his sycophantic lackey, his Quebec lieutenant. Who would expect any better from him? He is, as I understand it, a man who is extremely intolerant of criticism or even open disagreement.

[Argus]

I think Martin could have brushed it aside. Seems to have worked for Chretien.

You are correct in that Chretien brushed aside and stonewalled all accusations of corruption, nepotism, cronyism and massive patronage and incompetence. But he faced a divided opposition and was riding high in the polls because of it. Martin faced a single right wing party which was threatening to overtake him in the polls - with a looming election. He could not afford to do anything but try and appear like Mr. Clean, a complete break with the previous government.

Almost no one believed his protestations, however, that despite being Finance Minister and despite his massive following in the party, especially in Quebec, he hadn't heard a clue about this program.

Edited December 24, 2007 by Argus

[jbg]

An inquiry was ordered by Liberals? Let's be honest and say that Martin had no choice, and ordered an inquiry for a distant date in the presumption he would be in a new majority government by the time that inquiry met and released any information.

Unless I'm wrong, I thought Martin was eager for there to be an investigation -- of the Chretien wing of the Pary.

[Argus]

I'm suggesting that people thought Harper was a weak leader when in Opposition. Being Prime Minister changes that perception.

The public didn't think he was an indecisive weakling, they feared he was a brutal right wing dictator - haven't you even seen your own party's propaganda!? You are a party member, yes?

Its your opinion that the Liberal party doesn't have intelligent and honest people in the senior ranks.

Actually, it seems to be just about everyone's opinion. Who've you got? And don't say Dion or I'll blow coffee through my nose. Next to him you have that NDP guy who almost bankrupted Ontario, and that professor guy who's spent his entire life in Harvard (nice to have a guy with the common touch for your people's party). Oh, and let's not forget Mr. Perpetually Indignant, Mr. Always Self Righteous himself, Ralph Goodale! LOL

Oh if only Sheila Copps was back! She might not have been very smart, but at least she was shrill!

[jdobbin]

You are correct in that Chretien brushed aside and stonewalled all accusations of corruption, nepotism, cronyism and massive patronage and incompetence. But he faced a divided opposition and was riding high in the polls because of it. Martin faced a single right wing party which was threatening to overtake him in the polls - with a looming election. He could not afford to do anything but try and appear like Mr. Clean, a complete break with the previous government.

Almost no one believed his protestations, however, that despite being Finance Minister and despite his massive following in the party, especially in Quebec, he hadn't heard a clue about this program.

Many of Martin's problems stemmed from the long and painful inquiry. It certainly strengthened the Opposition's hand. One wonders if he had simply referred the Sheila Fraser's report to the RCMP if he would have been reduced to minority status.

[jdobbin]

The public didn't think he was an indecisive weakling, they feared he was a brutal right wing dictator - haven't you even seen your own party's propaganda!? You are a party member, yes?

Actually, it seems to be just about everyone's opinion. Who've you got? And don't say Dion or I'll blow coffee through my nose. Next to him you have that NDP guy who almost bankrupted Ontario, and that professor guy who's spent his entire life in Harvard (nice to have a guy with the common touch for your people's party). Oh, and let's not forget Mr. Perpetually Indignant, Mr. Always Self Righteous himself, Ralph Goodale! LOL

I think when they saw Harper's Calgary picture, they didn't think of him as a strong leader.

Once again, it your opinion on the Liberal party. One thing is certain politics is that each side thinks the other side is made up of the less noble or intelligent.

[jdobbin]

No one has ever been able to suggest a plausible reason why the RCMP commissioner, a noted Liberal Party lackey, would deliberately make decisions detrimental to their well-being based on some kind of strange, alleged desire to see the Tories in power.

Yes, curious about that no implausible reason.

In any event, I certainly am not going to defend Chretien. I think he should have had better control over what was happening on his own turf.

Edited December 24, 2007 by jdobbin

[Argus]

Many of Martin's problems stemmed from the long and painful inquiry. It certainly strengthened the Opposition's hand. One wonders if he had simply referred the Sheila Fraser's report to the RCMP if he would have been reduced to minority status.

If he had stonewalled on an inquiry after his party shut down the House hearings into it he would have been even more closely identified as a member of the gang who stole and misused our money. As it was people believe he was probably involved in some way, but his real problem was people saw him as weak and indecisive.

Much like your present "leader", in fact.

DO YOU THINK IT'S EASY TO MAKE PRIORITIES!!!?????

[Argus]

Yes, curious about that no implausible reason.

In any event, I certainly am not going to defend Chretien. I think he should have had better control over what was happening on his own turf.

Eh? Chretien was a noted control freak, though not as much as Martin and, I understand, Dion.

Chretien knew everything that was going on. He was even able to use the RCMP as party enforcers. How much more control do you think your leader should have?

[Michael Bluth]

Eh? Chretien was a noted control freak, though not as much as Martin and, I understand, Dion.

Are you saying that Martin and Dion were bigger control freaks?

I would have to disagree with that.

Martin was embarrassed by that crazy Carolyn Parrish stomping on the GW doll.

Dion wanted an election that his caucus didn't go for.

No way either happened under Chretien.

Paul Martin didn't exert enough control over his caucus. Doesn't look like Dion is either...

[jdobbin]

Eh? Chretien was a noted control freak, though not as much as Martin and, I understand, Dion.

Chretien knew everything that was going on. He was even able to use the RCMP as party enforcers. How much more control do you think your leader should have?

I don't know that anyone has been able to say what Chretien knew or didn't know. You certainly seem convinced though.

[jdobbin]

If he had stonewalled on an inquiry after his party shut down the House hearings into it he would have been even more closely identified as a member of the gang who stole and misused our money. As it was people believe he was probably involved in some way, but his real problem was people saw him as weak and indecisive.

I haven't seen anything to indicate that people believed he was involved. Had he referred it to the RCMP, he probably would have looked decisive. However, he wanted to prove he was above board and open. An inquiry can often swallow everyone involved. I think Harper realizes that now and is backing away from a Mulroney inquiry since it is usually the party in power that takes the brunt.

I guess Harper forgot what his priorities were.

[Michael Bluth]

I haven't seen anything to indicate that people believed he was involved. Had he referred it to the RCMP, he probably would have looked decisive. However, he wanted to prove he was above board and open. An inquiry can often swallow everyone involved.

It's easy not to see when your eyes are covered.

Martin fell into the fallacy that he was shrewder than Chretien and a better operative.

He felt an inquiry would prove he was different from the old guy.

In many senses Martin's failure is equivalent with Al Gore's. Both thought they were better than the guy they replaced. Both were wrong. Both will go down as failures in history.

[Argus]

Are you saying that Martin and Dion were bigger control freaks?

I would have to disagree with that.

Martin was embarrassed by that crazy Carolyn Parrish stomping on the GW doll.

Dion wanted an election that his caucus didn't go for.

No way either happened under Chretien.

Paul Martin didn't exert enough control over his caucus. Doesn't look like Dion is either...

Don't mistake what a person can do with what a person wants to do. Chretien had complete control over his party due to a variety of circumstances, most especially a huge majority and a divided weak opposition. Anyone who opposed him was simply booted without fear of causing the party damage. Martin did not have that same luxury. Nor does Dion. Given a whopping big majority and a weak, divided opposition you'd quickly see them asserting their control.